On Tue, 3 Sep 2024, Thomas Ward wrote:
> I just don't want to have to be going through backports approvals for the > package every time I update it. Idea is to remove the slower processing time > where possible. Ah ok, upload and self-approve. This kind of exception would obviously only be usable by a member of the backports (or archive) team, and I feel like it would be better for us to use the same process as everyone else (i.e. uploader and reviewer are different people) to try to make sure all backports get regular attention. It also helps to have a second set of eyes on an upload just in case. I'm not strongly opposed though if you and/or mapreri feel like these kind of exceptions are needed. > > > > Sent from my Galaxy > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: ddstreet <[email protected]> > Date: 9/3/24 15:04 (GMT-05:00) > To: [email protected], Backports Discussion > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Request for BPO Exception: XCA > > > > On Mon, 8 Jul 2024, Thomas Ward wrote: > > > > > Hello. > > > > > > > > The Universe package XCA is a tool for creating and managing X.509 > > certificates, certificate requests, RSA/DSA/EC private keys, Smartcard > > integrations, and CRLs. It is designed so > that > > a CA can be fully functional from the tooling itself (except for OCSP > > responders, etc.). > > > > > > > > There are changes that happen to the XCA package that include changes that > > break reverse compatibility due to feature changes, etc. and in turn is why > > I backported XCA recently. > > > > > > > > I am the Debian package maintainer as well as the Ubuntu ‘maintainer’. It > > has no reverse dependencies, and it is recommended that the latest version > > of XCA be used instead of > differing > > versions because sometimes things get added to the underlying DB (SQLite, > > etc.) format that needs latest versions to work with because of > > occasionally reverse-incompatible changes. > > > > > > > > Therefore, because of newer features and changes that are beyond just bug > > fixes, it is prudent to have the version in Devel match the version in > > stable releases. > > > > > > > > To that end, I’d like to request a backports exception for src:xca so that > > I can continue to provide the backported versions regularly to current > > supported LTS releases. > > > > First, sorry for my obviously very late reply :-) > > This all sounds like xca falls into the normal case for backported packages, > so unless I'm misunderstanding, it doesn't seem like any exception is > required? > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Ward > > Debian Maintainer of src:xca > > > > Ubuntu Core Developer > > > > > > > >
-- ubuntu-backports mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
