nginx package signature guarantees with Xenial?

Robie Basak robie.basak at
Fri Jul 1 11:10:25 UTC 2016

Hi Jeff,

Sorry, I just remembered this thread and that I hadn't replied.

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 03:06:13PM -0400, Jeff Kaufman wrote:
> > Have you considered adding your module to Ubuntu's repositories? Is
> > there any reason you couldn't maintain them in xenial-backports for the
> > benefit of Xenial users, for example?

Note that the usual route to adding packages to Ubuntu is via Debian.
Though then you'd have to deal with the rebuilds in collaboration with
the Debian nginx maintainers too, as well as the rebuilds in stable
Ubuntu releases and backports[2] which would have to be done

> That's possible.  I don't have a great sense of what that would
> entail.  For example, if the nginx package maintainer updated nginx,
> the package for ngx_pagespeed would need to be rebuilt.  Is there a
> good way to handle this?

If there's a particular reason you don't want to do that then Ubuntu
does accept Ubuntu-specific (not from Debian) packages too.

Unfortunately, we don't really have a good way right now. However, in
Ubuntu, we work in teams rather than owning specific maintainerships
like Debian. If we know that ngx_pagespeed needs to be rebuilt, I expect
that we'll JFDI. For example, we already do this with pinba-engine-mysql
as needed.

In the development release, an update can't land in the release pocket
if it causes other packages to become uninstallable[1], so we should
also notice. This assumes that the dependencies are set up correctly.

In a stable release, I don't think we currently track this because it is
quite an unusual case (I only know of pinba-engine-mysql and now this).
But I'm sure the SRU team[3] would be open to some additional CI to
prevent accidents if you're interested in driving this.

We do expect that those interested in the package (in this case, you)
are available to fix any issues though, for example if it fails to
build, or otherwise blocks a new nginx release going in. We usually use
IRC but this mailing list is fine to make contact too.

> > Note that it's 16.04, not just 16. 16 will be ambiguous when a
> > subsequent 16.10 is released.
> But "16 LTS" isn't ambiguous, right?

I guess not. You can call it what you like of course, though I don't
think the Ubuntu release team or any Ubuntu developers call it that :)

Sorry again for my delay in responding.



More information about the ubuntu-server mailing list