Hi, On Tue, 26 Sep 2023, Santiago Ruano Rincón wrote: > > > Agreed, a split makes sense, it causes marginal additional overhead and > > > makes > > > the whole setup more explicit. > > > > cloning this bug once more so we don't forget about this. > > (I think the moreinfo tag comes from the original bug) > > I hope this MR correctly splits the limited support file: > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/debian-security-support/-/merge_requests/17
As I commented on the MR, I think it would be a good move to merge "ended" and "limited" files together. This will require more code changes but gives a clearer overview of the restrictions affecting a given release. We could have a single file per release with 3 fields: * package (or package regexp) * supported (true/false), trues implies limited support, false means not supported * comment (should explain the limitation if supported == true) We could keep an unversioned file (for unstable?) that would serve as template when we have to create a new release. Cheers, -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Raphaël Hertzog <hert...@debian.org> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ The Debian Handbook: https://debian-handbook.info/get/ ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Debian Long Term Support: https://deb.li/LTS
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
