Hi, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I understand how this use case ends up falling through the cracks. But > the backports infrastructure is not set up for maintaining original > packages (which PG 8.2 would be become, without a references package in > testing).
Uh.. so you are proposing to keep (revive) postgresql-8.2 in testing and backporting from there? That sounds like more trouble and work. Or do you think that's feasible? Doesn't that violate the policy of 'testing'? Otherwise, as stated, I'd recommend to never backport a Postgres major version which may be removed from testing in the future. Just to keep users from believing it's safe to use and maintained. Either way is better than status quo of Postgres in backports, IMO. (Which relies on the flaky assumption that pg_upgradecluster can be used to upgrade between major versions). > So you will probably have to put in a bit more effort to come > up with a sustainable maintenance model, plus the resources to enact it. Well, I'm providing the necessary packages for i386 and amd64. And I'm offering to maintain them. But I am not in the position to decide where to make these available - besides offering them from my own server as I already do. I'd be happy to upload to testing or etch-backports or both... or even help maintaining the official Postgres packages for Debian. Regards Markus Wanner -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
