Hi, On Wed, 04 Jun 2025, Micha Lenk wrote: > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports-announce/2024/07/msg00000.html, > > > bullseye-backports no longer accepts uploads and should not be expected to > > > be up-to-date with bookworm{,-security}. I think it would make sense to > > > drop it from the "versions" and "versioned links" panels on the package > > > tracker at this point. > > > > Why? > > One potential rationale that comes to my mind is
FTR, I'm not asking why backports is active only 3 years, I know the rationale (mainly that backports are maintained by volunteers and that when you introduce a backport you have the responsibility to maintain it properly over the lifetime of the target release, and the team doesn't want to impose 5 years to volunteers). I don't agree with it and the level of expectation that is set on backport maintainers, and I believe it doesn't really match the reality anyway as some backports are never updated. But that's another debate. I'm just asking "What does it gain us to hide the version that is still available and installable from the no longer maintained repository ?". Arguably, if I drop bullseye-backports, I should also drop buster. But I don't see the value of that. As I said, this table is like "rmadison" for me, it doesn't imply anything on the support level of any listed package, it just documents what is available where. Cheers, -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Raphaël Hertzog <hert...@debian.org> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ The Debian Handbook: https://debian-handbook.info/get/ ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Debian Long Term Support: https://deb.li/LTS
