Hi, On Fri, 06 Jun 2025, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > On 6/3/25 15:05, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > I mean it doesn't disappear from the rmadison output either, and I see > > that table as a web version of "rmadison". > > Perhaps such unsupported legacy distributions could get a light gray > background.
That's a possibility, but tracker.d.o is not supposed to be the authoritative source for that information. Ideally it would come for the repository metadata. I have argued quite regularly that we should modify the "Release" file to document the EOL date of the repository, and then have apt warn about it, possibly linking to some helpful documentation. https://salsa.debian.org/lts-team/lts-extra-tasks/-/issues/17 Someone should really bite the bullet and start the conversation with ftpmasters and/or APT developers to define a proper field structure for this. (Arguably, we could also figure out some way to extract this from the latest distro-info-data, but that still seems a work around to the lack of the information in the right place) Cheers, -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Raphaël Hertzog <hert...@debian.org> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ The Debian Handbook: https://debian-handbook.info/get/ ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Debian Long Term Support: https://deb.li/LTS
