Hi Dennis, Am Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 01:20:22PM +0100 schrieb Dennis van Dok: > > I'm happy to realise this. I'm very sorry about the wrong assumtion - > > I'm probably way to used to the situation that I get no answer at all. > > No worries--we are glad the situation has been made clear.
Thank you for taking it this way. I'm really happy about this. > > Since I have some experience in doing this I could offer to do this as > > "punishment" for my wrong assumptions. If you tell me whether you have > > some prefered team (maybe Debian Science or plain Debian team) I could > > create a repository with the content of past releases. > > I shouldn't worry about it. I've migrated to github for now, but the release > cycle is so long I don't think there is a benefit to moving to Salsa? > > See https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1124782 > > and > https://github.com/NDPF/mwsec-packaging-debian/tree/main/lcas-lcmaps-gt4-interface > > If there *is* a benefit (maybe due to running build pipelines by the time > Debian 14 comes around) I am happy to move it to Salsa as well. This are the benefits I see on hosting the packaging on Salsa: 1. This is Debian packaging, and Salsa is where Debian packaging expertise lives. 2. You can benefit easily from automated maintenance (e.g. janitor MR proposals). 3. Salsa CI can verify the packaging and provide full logs when other Debian developers need to help debug issues. 4. Salsa is the canonical place other Debian contributors will look first. 5. Merge requests from drive-by contributors are more likely on Salsa. 6. Consistent access control via Debian accounts (no extra GitHub setup). Even with long release cycles, hosting on Salsa mainly reduces future friction — migration later is usually more work than starting there. Kind regards Andreas. -- https://fam-tille.de
