said:
> Am Donnerstag, den 30.11.2017, 09:25 -0800 schrieb Walter Lapchynski:
>> I'm currently trying to backport offlineimap from zesty to trusty.
>> This
>> may be a bit ambitious given the python depends, but I'm taking it as
>> a
>> good learning experience.
> did you consider a snap ?
No, I did not. What guarantee would there be that a user with Trusty
would be able to even find it? If they have trusty-backports installed
and there's standard packaging, they'll automagically get the update.
Not so with snaps. Snaps are nice and all, but they don't seem really
ideal as a backport solution for this very reason. If this is a common
response to backports, I guess it explains why there are so many
unanswered backport requests against Trusty. Maybe if there were whole
desktop systems completely maintained through snaps only, this might be
a reasonable approach, but we don't have that.
Furthermore, that this really does not answer the original question. I
find it quite possible that the question will still stand regardless of
whether or not I considered a snap. This is a build-level issue, from
what I can tell, not necessarily a matter of the packaging framework.
That said, do you have any relevant advice?
--
@wxl | polka.bike
C563 CAC5 8BE1 2F22 A49D
68F6 8B57 A48B C4F2 051A
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
