Re: Backports policy for security updates (was: Re: python-django_1.8.18-1~bpo8+1_amd64.changes REJECTED)
On May 24, 2017 9:09:04 AM EDT, Alexander Wirt <formorer@formorer.de> wrote:
>On Wed, 24 May 2017, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2017-05-24 at 22:05 +1000, Stuart Prescott wrote:
>> > I routinely backport packages and deploy them locally. I frequently
>wonder
>> > if I should upload them to make them more widely useful. And
>then...
>> >
>> > Perhaps I'm snipping too much here, but is this what you're saying?
>> >
>> > > > Now I'm confused. I thought as a backporter my responsibility
>for
>> > > > oldstable was limited to the one year period after the new
>stable was
>> > > > released? Are backporters responsible for LTS support too?
>> > > Of course you are.
>> >
>> > wait, because a few people started an unofficial project to extend
>support
>> > of the stable release, everyone else is now responsible for
>supporting that
>> > effort in all manner of other places?
>> [...]
>> > Uploading a
>> > backport has suddenly become a blank cheque for maintenance subject
>to
>> > future prolongation. Sounds like a world of pain I should avoid.
>Sorry.
>>
>> I agree; this is not a reasonable demand. I only started working on
>> LTS on the basis that I could do it in work hours. I don't expect
>> anyone to do this comparatively boring stuff as a volunteer.
>>
>> The backports suites and their users would benefit from some
>> clarification about which packages remain supported and how long this
>> is likely to last - defaulting to the end of regular support for the
>> corresponding stable suite.
>We will probably close jessie-bpo with the end of the main support. It
>seems
>that is was a nice idea, but it unsupportable.
>
>Alex
If so, we're back to upstream Django 1.8 support being roughly aligned to when jessie-backports closes, so can we please continue updating it?
If you're to angry with Raphael to let him do it, I volunteer.
Scott K
Reply to: