On Sat, 07 Jun 2008, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 12:20:04PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > On Sat, 07 Jun 2008, Christian Perrier wrote: > > > As of now, oldstable is no longer supported (security-wise). > > > > I wonder whether it should still be listed on p.q.d.o pages in such > > > situations, which might be misleading to out users. > > > The PTS is mostly static and it's painful to make stuff appear and > > disappear based on a criteria that can't be checked programmatically. > > If you added a toggle for "is oldstable supported?", then surely that would > then be a programmatic check...?
The thing is that I don't want to have to keep that information synchronized myself. I already have to manually update the current policy version in the XSL stylesheet, I'd rather not add other similar duplicate information that we have to keep in sync. > > So my vote goes to keep it. If you solve the problem of detecting if > > oldstable is supported or not, we can eventually put it in another color > > or put a title attribute over it to mark it's no more supported. > > I think it's fair to leave oldstable listed on p.q.d.o until such time as > oldstable is dropped from the archive. I guess mirror disk space is not a > pressing issue right now, since this hasn't happened yet. Right, when it disappear I think the download script starts complaining anyway. :-) Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
