Re: [Openvpn-devel] Separate apt repositories for 2.4-alpha/beta/rc releases?

Am 15.10.2016 um 12:11 schrieb David Sommerseth: > b) Have the package exclude each other to block both being installed >at the same time. That's the path normally chosen and that I'd recommend for DEB/APT-based packages because solvers can usually figure that part out. I think the RPM world

Re: [Openvpn-devel] Separate apt repositories for 2.4-alpha/beta/rc releases?

Am 14.10.2016 um 21:51 schrieb Steffan Karger: > > On 14 Oct 2016 9:14 p.m., "Matthias Andree" > wrote: > > > > Am 14.10.2016 um 17:28 schrieb Samuli Seppänen: > > > > Would 2.3.12 -> 2.4-alpha1 be too big an upgrade? > > > > > Yes,

Re: [Openvpn-devel] Separate apt repositories for 2.4-alpha/beta/rc releases?

On 14 Oct 2016 9:14 p.m., "Matthias Andree" wrote: > > Am 14.10.2016 um 17:28 schrieb Samuli Seppänen: > > Hi, > > > > Should we have a separate apt repository for "unstable" apt packages? > > Right now our apt repositories hold 2.3.x packages, meaning that > > upgrades

Re: [Openvpn-devel] Separate apt repositories for 2.4-alpha/beta/rc releases?

Am 14.10.2016 um 17:28 schrieb Samuli Seppänen: > Hi, > > Should we have a separate apt repository for "unstable" apt packages? > Right now our apt repositories hold 2.3.x packages, meaning that > upgrades have historically been fairly minor. > > That said, users who use _our_ apt repositories

[Openvpn-devel] Separate apt repositories for 2.4-alpha/beta/rc releases?

Hi, Should we have a separate apt repository for "unstable" apt packages? Right now our apt repositories hold 2.3.x packages, meaning that upgrades have historically been fairly minor. That said, users who use _our_ apt repositories have expressed interest in using something newer than what