Le mer. 27 mars 2019 à 14:02, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <po...@debian.org> a écrit : > Yes, I talked to them earlier today and they agreed to bringing it back to > avoid > these problems on users that have jessie-updates on their sources.list.
That would be wonderful to ease the transition in the LTS phase of Jessie. If done, it might be relevant to rephrase [2] to explain it exists for compatibility reasons but it's left empty. > jessie-proposed-updates could also be brought back, though that's not enabled > by > default upon installation so it should be less problematic if it stays removed > (though some people may have it so it wouldn't hurt to bring it back as well). I personally don't use proposed-updates on the kind of server that stay alive long enough to reach LTS, but why not bring it back too in order to make the transition as smooth as possible. Also, for next time, this could be relevant to add this requirement to keep -updates/ (and maybe -proposed-updates/) to some kind of procedure while transitioning the release in its LTS stage. I found the documentation about contributing to LTS as a developer [1] but not how you handle internally the transition form the standard support team to the LTS support team. But I guess there exists some kind of procedure for it. For the future of transitioning Stretch from standard support to LTS, this could be valuable so the transition could be perfectly smooth ? [1] https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Development [2] https://wiki.debian.org/StableUpdates
