> On Nov 4, 2015, at 3:32 AM, Kristian Lyngstol <[email protected]> wrote: > > The plan for Debian is to provide updated packages through backports, > and Ingvar is working on the solution[1] for EPEL and Fedora. As both > ssm and Ingvar are active users of the software and packages, that > should more than cover those distros. That still leaves Ubuntu, where I > figure a PPA is in order.
For Debian, EPEL & Fedora, that sounds like a perfrect solution. Regarding PPAs, there’s one snag: A PPA can only host 1 version of a package at a time. From https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA/Draft: >>> Each user and team in Launchpad can have a single public PPA. If you want >>> to have different versions of the same package, testing different features >>> or focused on different use cases, then we would encourage you to create a >>> new team and use the PPA for that team. That way, for example, you can have >>> a team of people interested in "server" issues that has one version of the >>> Apache package, and another interested in "workstation" issues that has a >>> different version of the same package, each in a different PPA. The obvious drawback here is that it forces people to roll forward with Varnish releases, or the Ubuntu maintainer to host lots of teams & PPAs. Perhaps this could be an alternative? They seem to offer OSS packages: https://packagecloud.io/ > I think we're pretty much on the same page, just a slight > misunderstanding. No change in what's available except for the better, > but possible change in where to get it. Relevant guides/pages will > obviously be updated. Awesome - thanks for clarifying. — Entropy isn’t what it used to be...
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ varnish-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
