On 27/05/2013 15:39, W. van den Akker wrote: > Are thinking about backporting it? > My production system is running still 1.x
I'd like to, but only once I am completely happy with the packaging. I have lots of changes lined up for the -2 version that I hope to upload later in the week. It would also be great to have an answer to my question about creating transitional packages first. [adding Laszlo as a CC as he wasn't on the first message, my apologies] Cheers, Chris > On Mon, 2013-05-27 at 13:39 +0100, Chris Boot wrote: >> On 23/05/2013 14:23, Maykel Moya wrote: >> > El 23/05/13 07:57, W. van den Akker escribió: >> > >> >> Any progress in this? I like to see v2.0 into debian due to ipv6 >> >> logging capabilities. >> > >> > Thanks to nice work by Chris Boot ulogd2 finally entered sid[1]. >> > See the ITP[2] for further info. >> > >> > Regards, maykel >> > >> > [1] http://packages.debian.org/sid/ulogd2 [2] >> > http://bugs.debian.org/502305 >> > >> >> Hi folks, >> >> Indeed, I have uploaded my ulogd2 package. It would be great if you >> could have a look and let me know your comments. One of the reasons I >> did it as a new package was because I simply couldn't see a way of >> converting the configuration between ulogd-1.x and ulogd-2.x at all; >> they are very different programs indeed. >> >> Now that ulogd-1.x is end-of-life ("All production systems should >> migrate to the stable series ulogd-2.x as soon as possible as we do >> not plan to make more 1.x releases."[1]), I'd like to suggest making >> the ulogd package transitional. Do you support this suggestion? >> >> Laszlo: I'd be happy to adopt ulogd to do the transition if you would >> like. >> >> Best regards, >> Chris >> >> [1] http://netfilter.org/projects/ulogd/index.html -- Chris Boot bo...@bootc.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
