Transitioning to SP3
wferi at niif.hu
Mon Jul 30 16:05:03 BST 2018
Etienne Dysli Metref <etienne.dysli-metref at switch.ch> writes:
> On 28/07/18 15:40, Ferenc Wágner wrote:
>> 1. Some current package (and repository) names contain version numbers:
>> opensaml2, shibboleth-sp2 and their binaries. Shall we
>> a) drop the number,
>> b) bump it to 3, or
>> c) leave it alone?
>> Option a) seems the cleanest but brings in transitional packages,
>> option c) does not require any extra work but brings in confusion.
> I would favour cleaning up the names with option a). Option b) would
> require transitional packages as well wouldn't it?
Right, I don't think option b) has any advantages. I'm planning to go
with option a), that is, removing the version numbers from the names.
Once the public part (the packages) are done, we can rename our repos
>> 2. Given that the stack has already been removed from testing, do we
>> have to perform a formal transition and stage in experimental, or is
>> it okay to upload the new versions to unstable one after the other?
> I don't feel familiar enough with "the Debian way" to answer that.
Nevermind, experimental is probably helpful for us and isn't a great
overhead, so I'll upload there first to pass the NEW queue, then do
source only uploads to unstable for good measure.
More information about the Pkg-shibboleth-devel