Re: python-django_1.8.18-1~bpo8+1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Rhonda, you are turning into circles and not answering my real questions
here:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports/2017/05/msg00174.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports/2017/05/msg00112.html
Please answer me. Thank you.
On Thu, 25 May 2017, Rhonda D'Vine wrote:
> > However if 1.10.x enters backports, then that would mean all these
> > updated packages would then have to get rebuilt for backports. This
> > additional work is not required if backports stays with Django 1.8.x
>
> binNMUs are no real work.
Django is Python. I don' see how binNMU come into play here. The job is
not "rebuilding".
The problem described here is that if we have Django reverse dependencies
in backports (I don't know if we have any), right now they have been
tested/validated with Django 1.7.x (stable) or 1.8.x (jessie-backports)
and switching to 1.10.x will likely break some of those packages that
were relying on deprecated features that got removed in 1.9.x and 1.10.x.
> > I suspect this would mean more packages entering backports.
>
> How so? If there are backports of django packages it sounds almost
> they wouldn't really follow the minimum changes, wouldn't those
> backports require actually more work to make them work with 1.8 instead
> of 1.10?
I don't understand how Brian came to this conclusion either, unless he's
speaking of uploading to backports version of packages in stable that
would be broken when running with Django from jessie-backports.
> > Hence the desire to keep backports on Django 1.8.x, to avoid these API
> > changes.
>
> If django regularly changes API in such ways it should be considered
> before backporting, not sticking at an extra version that doesn't relate
> to what we have in testing.
So, for you, the rules are more important than the service we provide to
our users. For me, it's the opposite.
> > Doing so also means increased stability of the software in backports
> > that depends on Django - which is important for some people.
>
> Software that depends on django in backports will be instable if its
> upgraded to 1.10? If so, that would also mean they are instable in
> stretch. Please fix that in a soon stable release.
(*shrugh*)
All the Django ecosystem makes effort to work well with LTS versions
of Django. So providing an LTS version is beneficial and can avoid issues
with some applications which have not been vetted against non-LTS
versions.
But that's all very high level discussion that are not very interesting
and that certainly can't be turned into a "please fix this in a stable
release".
> And Raphael - if you would have contacted us beforehand instead of
> intentionally do not this could all have been avoided and a useful
> discussion could have been had. Don't turn this around that the mess
> that we are in now is our fault because you did choose not to
> communicate.
I'm sorry, but I fail to see how it would have been different. I would
have been in front of the same wall, you would not understand why I want
to maintain the LTS version in jessie-backports and my use case would not
be important enough for you to bend your policy.
> of the norm. *Before* they do it. Any mess could be avoided through
> active communication. The mess only starts when communication is
> avoided where it is desperately needed to get everyone involved on
> board. I'm extremely disappointed by that choice and would hope that a
> lesson was learned. We are open to constructive discussions, but not on
> the grounds after harm was done but very much beforehand.
I am not a 2-year old kid that will learn a lesson because you
kick me with a stick on the fingers. I would have hoped that you
could explain what is "messy" in this situation.
There's nothing messy for my backport users (there are many persons
who explained that they are happily using my backport which benefits from
security upgrades), there's nothing messy for the contributor doing the
work (aka me, except the fact that I have to deal with this thread). The
only mess is the one that you are seeing and your only words to describe
that mess is "you are not following the policy".
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Support Debian LTS: https://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html
Learn to master Debian: https://debian-handbook.info/get/
Reply to: