Hello Luca, Am 22.07.2014 13:59, schrieb Luca Capello: > Any reason why this is not on Alioth?
there is no special reason, I just started last year the packaging and wanted the repo putting in some "official" place to let other see the current state. But I wanted be able to rebase and push my work without any take care for on person depended on a repository in a more public place like Alioth. Once the package is accepted it will move to Alioth. > Actually, using a *plain* wheezy chroot is not enough: ... > Here is the reason: > ===== > $ rmadison icedove-dev | grep wheezy > icedove-dev | 10.0.12-1 | wheezy | amd64, armel, armhf, > i386, ia64, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, > s390x, sparc > icedove-dev | 17.0.10-1~deb7u1 | wheezy-security | ia64, kfreebsd-amd64, > kfreebsd-i386, mips, mipsel > icedove-dev | 24.5.0-1~deb7u1 | wheezy-security | s390, sparc > icedove-dev | 24.6.0-1~deb7u1 | wheezy-security | amd64, armel, armhf, > i386, powerpc, s390x > $ > ===== > > I confirm that adding the wheezy-security repository is enought to build > a wheezy-backports without changing anything in the current Debian > sources on GitHub. I know this circumstance, but thanks for hinting. > Since we currently use this extension, I am interested in a > wheezy-backports and I could maintain it by myself, but only once it > reaches testing and anyway not before the next 3 months. A backport is heavily depending on entering the testing release, so I still don't care much about it in the current state. But as you wrote it's more a question of the chroot to build a backport package. Right know I would be happy to get the connector into testing before the freeze. -- Regards Carsten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53ceb08c.4060...@t-online.de
