Shibboleth2 packaging

Ferenc Wagner wferi at
Wed May 14 22:26:33 UTC 2008

Russ Allbery <rra at> writes:

> Ferenc Wagner <wferi at> writes:
>> Russ Allbery <rra at> writes:
> At the moment, it has to wait anyway, since xml-security-c 1.4 is in NEW.
> That's the reason why I haven't uploaded anything yet.  As soon as that
> clears NEW, we should be able to start uploading the other packages.

I forgot about this.  Will you also create a backport for Etch?  We'll
need one anyway, it's only a question of you or me... :)  But I don't
know how.

> Certainly if someone else is willing to work on the packages, that would
> be great; the more, the merrier.  But that isn't the holdup at the
> moment at least.

Okay, I'll see if anybody would take a look, even while xml-security
is in NEW.

>> As a side note, during the xmltooling initial upload a non packaging
>> related change got into the debian branch (the workaround for
>>  That should probably
>> be moved into its own branch.  What naming scheme would you prefer?
> I've been using bug/<name> for upstream bugs and feature/<name> for new
> features introduced in the Debian package, and that seems to work
> reasonably well.
>> Similarly, do you mind if I split off an etch branch from the debian
>> branch for backport work?  Would it also warrant another integration
>> branch besides master?
> Please go ahead.  Usually backport work is simple enough that I wouldn't
> bother with a separate integration branch.

Hope I got these right...

More information about the Pkg-shibboleth-devel mailing list