[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnewsense-dev] suggestion: sources.list reference webpage

From: Karl Goetz
Subject: Re: [Gnewsense-dev] suggestion: sources.list reference webpage
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 21:37:54 +0930

On Sat, 01 May 2010 16:48:58 +0200
Sam Geeraerts <address@hidden> wrote:

> Karl Goetz schreef:
> > On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:52:56 +0200
> > al3xu5 / dotcommon <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> >> hi
> >>
> >> many people often need updated informations about the gnewsense
> >> repositories (sources.list entries, pubkeys, ...) to check/fix the
> >> repositories they have in their sources.list and the corresponding
> >> signatures
> >>
> >> so please let me suggest having a "gNS repositories reference
> >> page" on the gnewsense website (better if in the main index), in
> >> order to:

> >> - have a list of all the corresponding signatures (linking the
> >> pubkeys for downloading)
> >> - have a changelog (maybe it could be the page history) 
> > 
> > changelog of repositories ??
> As in the recent metad/updates change. But those changes are only 
> interesting when they happen, not a few months after. They get
> announced on the mailing list, so I don't see a need for a changelog.

These changes happen so infrequently that I don't think its worth
worrying about.

> >> so the advantage having just such one place where put all the
> >> repositories related infos should be either for developers (which
> >> could put here all the infos, keep them updated, and use just links
> > 
> > Developers change the repository info in python-apt, and only i have
> > access to the signing keys.
> I guess al3xu5 means developers in the broad sense, including user
> support.

I'm not sure I follow sorry.
Are you saying 3rd parties should put their gpg keys there?

> >> writing to the gNS mailing lists) or for users (which could quickly
> >> find all the updated references they need, without asking
> >> developers or writing to the gNS mailing lists)
> > 
> > We should really fix /usr/share/doc/apt/examples/sources.list and
> > cite that. ( High priority bug, since it talks about debians
> > non-free repos)
> Also a bug in deltah, it seems: 

Not surprised.

> >> to me, it seems to be a good idea but... 
> >> if it is not, please sorry :-)
> > 
> > Its not a /bad/ idea, i'm just not sure duplicating the data is
> > helpful. Other thoughts?
> I don't remember any questions about the keys (apart from when they 
> expired), so when we have the example sources.list I don't see a need
> to put something on the wiki. Anyone is free to do it anyway, of
> course. If that happens and it turns out there's a real use for it
> then we can still move it to www.

When the bugs above are fixed, I think a note on another page with
instruction 'look in this file here' should be enough for the
sources.list bit.

Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
No, I won't join your social networking group

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]