[Pkg-zope-developers] Re: about the pkg-zope repositories

[Fabio Tranchitella]

Il giorno mar, 16/08/2005 alle 10.39 +0200, Andreas Tille ha scritto:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
> 
> >  I really agree with you. But I would prefer some testing on the
> > packages actually in experimental before uploading them into unstable.
> I have to admit that I personally do not any testing in experimental.  This
> is way below my visible horizont in day-to-day work.  So you might facing
> the situation that you are the only tester of the experimental packages.

Again, I think I'm lacking of experience. Should I do something to ask
for testing of those packages? I'm just asking myself if unstable would
have been a better place for wide testing, and your sentece give me no
sense for experimental repository. :)

> > I haven't had enough time to deeply check them, and as you already know
> > debian zope users usually run unstable machines because stable zope
> > versions are terribly outdated.
> If somebody is using unstable he is using this on his own risk.  I'm using
> stable on my production servers (even one runs under Woody with Zope 2.5.1).

Ok, let's take for example plone. Version 2.1 will be released soon (in
few days or weeks), and it will require at least zope 2.7.7 (not
available in sarge, which we released a two monthgs ago). So you will
remain at plone 2.0.5 and zope 2.7.5 even for your new projects? 
I don't think it is reasonable, mainly because the packages we upload
into unstable/testing are often already declared stable from upstream
developers (and this is the case of plone 2.1).

Maybe we should provide *official* backports for stable? 
Any opinion about this?

> My hope was that *you* would know this.  I think in the uploaders field
> has to be a e-mail address which is in the Debian keyring which pkg-zope-devel
> is definitely not.  The reasoning behind my intention was that anybody
> who is reading this can feel free to add his own upload addres to this
> field if necessary.  I have no idea how this can be done else.  People
> who raised the group maintainance issue might perhaps know more ...

Might the use of the pkg-zope-devel address in che changelog (with the
use of "-k" switch for dpkg-buildpackage to specify the gpg key to use
to sign the packages) be a good idea?

-- 
Fabio Tranchitella <kobold at debian.org>                        .''`.
Proud Debian GNU/Linux developer, admin and user.            : :'  :
                                                             `. `'`
   http://people.debian.org/~kobold/                           `-
_____________________________________________________________________
1024D/7F961564, fpr 5465 6E69 E559 6466 BF3D 9F01 2BF8 EE2B 7F96 1564
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-zope-developers/attachments/20050816/53dab95d/attachment-0001.pgp