[08:57] <mapreri> Unit193: can't you file things like LP: #1658268 in debian instead?  Givan that you are also a Debian contributor I'm surprised you preferred to go through ubuntu instead, tbh.
[09:04] <nkh> Hi guys, I need to set up a local repository on my server, but I want to setup and maintain it like real ubuntu repositories, I mean I have to support multiple distributions, provide dist-upgrades, so one can migrate from 14.04 to 16.04 and get the new packages ... I want to automate this on my server. For example, I have some packages being built on the server by continues integration [Jenkins]  ... Anyhow, I need to know about how actual ubuntu repositories
[09:25] <Unit193> mapreri: I'm a Debian contributor? :3  (But yeah, I have more upload perms here, easier time with the bt, etc.)  Also, while I didn't file anything, already talked to upstream (and have been in contact for a while), and the maintainer isn't planning on updating it before stretch.
[09:26] <mapreri> yes, updating to stretch now is a bad idea; you know, freeze and all.  but he could uploda to experimental and we could sync from there.
[09:26] <mapreri> but so you're in contact with the debian maintainer too?
[09:30] <Unit193> "In contact" would be a bit of an overstatement, I emailed and he never responded.  What I know I heard from upstream, and he said "No openssl 1.1 support, no upload."
[09:31] <mapreri> oh
[09:31] <mapreri> well
[09:32] <mapreri> Unit193: did you use the version you download with uscan, i.e. sha256 0e0a2db4dc7ac591c4368989329773a1b2399bca959d1cc10fa9f95884acc1ec ?
[09:39] <Unit193> mapreri: Yeah I've been using 0e0a2db4dc7ac591c4368989329773a1b2399bca959d1cc10fa9f95884acc1ec since about the time it came out, and a snapshot before that.
[09:41] <Unit193> mapreri: I'd rather there be no incompatibilities between Debian and Ubuntu, but to me the newer version is worth it considering the better keys.
[09:42] <mapreri> Unit193: nonetheless, please file a debian bug too, possibly link it with the lp bug.