MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAAaqYe8ODM-Qsofh8E+stPqTMffLBwmZKU43mHJP+uN0eWJmrQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZGSWHq/vxjGF7p4W@msg.df7cb.de>
 <CAAaqYe-GvHw7m5WEKE9HFGQ+bRRC+0WNWjp1T+nXfNHAkuxczw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZGTvRlVcYtrAXiE8@msg.df7cb.de>
In-Reply-To: <ZGTvRlVcYtrAXiE8@msg.df7cb.de>
From: James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 15:15:49 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAAaqYe-bK5FXXx8_eD-z7SVfOUYBy=wre7wjg7fPhRZAgyTa+g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Postgres 15.2 packages missing
To: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>
Cc: pgsql-pkg-debian@lists.postgresql.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAAaqYe-bK5FXXx8_eD-z7SVfOUYBy%3Dwre7wjg7fPhRZAgyTa%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 11:14=E2=80=AFAM Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org> w=
rote:
>
> Re: James Coleman
> > Thanks. I had a vague memory of something like that, but then when I
> > saw the 15.0 and 15.1 packages I assumed I'd remembered incorrectly.
> >
> > What's the reasoning for maintaining only the newest point release in t=
he repo?
>
> Mostly that reprepro that doesn't support it, unfortunately. It's
> still the best repo managing software around. We might have a look at
> "aptly", but its command line interface is somewhat weird and possibly
> not an improvement.
>
> Thanks for spotting the inconsistency, I managed to clean up the
> debris in there. The extra packages in there were mostly from old
> packages built while the distribution in question was still in
> development itself, so this wasn't even usable as a general wayback
> machine.
>
> apt-archive.postgresql.org is automatically kept up to date and
> receives all packages with a delay of one day.

Ah, that helps. Thanks for maintaining the repo.

I'm probably misunderstanding something here still, but is reprepro
_not_ used to manage the archive repo such that we don't have that
problem there?

Thanks,
James