launchpad-users team mailing list archive
-
launchpad-users team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #00498
Re: PPA's and officially supported vs. community-supported (ports) architectures
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Martin Pool<mbp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2009/6/19 Celso Providelo <celso.providelo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>> I understand your problem, although I find it very unlikely that we
>> will open the gates for binaries generated outside LP, because it
>> defeats a very important aspect of PPAs, trusted source -> binary
>> path.
>
> It is a bit strange to me that the PPAs would potentially trust
> Richard to upload source, but not trust him to upload binaries. I
> suppose source packages have a level of auditability, perhaps after
> the fact, that binaries do not.
>
>> We can always fallback to the official ubuntu backports repository or
>> the debian one (which was the original way of solving this) and/or
>
> Can we get ppc debs into the official backports? If so, that would be
> a good way to proceed.
>
Just a side note, but anything that is managed as a component of
Ubuntu is built on all architectures; *-backports are available for
all ports architectures).
>> maybe hosting the signed debs in Bzr project in LP.
>
> If we just want to publish the files it's easy enough to put them in
> Launchpad downloads, and in fact that's what I suggested Richard do
> for now. But it does have the substantial drawback that it no longer
> integrates nicely with apt.
>
> --
> Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-users
> Post to : launchpad-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-users
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
References