Backport uploads to non-LTS releases

[Martin Pitt]

Hello Dan,

Dan Streetman [2023-10-05 13:09 -0400]:
> I just reviewed and approved the cockpit-* uploads to jammy-backports,
> looked fine and no concerns there, thanks!

Thanks!

> For the uploads to lunar-backports, we had decided on a policy of not
> accepting backports into non-LTS releases, unless an exception was
> granted, so I didn't approve those uploads yet.
>
> @mapreri and @teward, do you remember why we decided that? Should we
> reconsider potentially changing the rule to allow non-LTS backports
> but not require them?

Hm, when/why was that changed? I remember in my time it was kind of the
opposite -- you *had* to provide backports for all supported releases. If a
user updates a backported package from jammy to lunar, we don't want them to
have "dangling" packages from old jammy-backports without any installation
source, or a matching build for that OS.

> Martin, if the lunar-backports uploads are important for you, please
> feel free to reply and we can consider either an exception for the
> cockpit-* packages, or possibly consider revising the no-non-LTS rule.

I don't consider it super-important for cockpit specifically, but it feels like
a dangerous rule due to the above?

Thanks,

Martin

P.S. sorry for late reply. I now changed my filtering rules to see u-backports@
email right away.