repository (wheezy), nor in testing
(jessie). If I understand correctly, Ubuntu doesn't have that kind of
release. It is my opinion that, given Ubuntu's methods of managing its
software, it would be better to not include Bitcoin in the Ubuntu
repositories, unless exceptions to the policies
://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bitcoin/+bug/1260602).
We could have demoted it to proposed and held it out with a blocking
bug, approximating the unstable only situation in Debian. But I
guess removing and blacklisting doesn't hurt my feelings either. My
general gut feeling to any developer saying this software
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 08:52:20AM -0700, Adam Conrad wrote:
We could have demoted it to proposed and held it out with a blocking
bug, approximating the unstable only situation in Debian. But I
guess removing and blacklisting doesn't hurt my feelings either. My
general gut feeling to any
), nor in testing (jessie). If I understand correctly,
Ubuntu doesn't have that kind of release. It is my opinion that, given
Ubuntu's methods of managing its software, it would be better to not
include Bitcoin in the Ubuntu repositories, unless exceptions to the
policies could be made, allowing all
release contains a harmful version, and only the backport version
would be safe to use. This is probably unacceptable to both Ubuntu and
Bitcoin.
Also, the bitcoin package is only really necessary to run a full node.
Users that want to run a wallet can use electrum (in ubuntu and
debian) or multibit
that, given Ubuntu's methods of managing its
software, it would be better to not include Bitcoin in the Ubuntu
repositories, unless exceptions to the policies could be made, allowing
all supported Ubuntu versions to get the latest updates as they come down
from upstream. As a first step, the Bitcoin
