Re: Unsing stable-backports as an ugprade path to stable+1
2022, ജനുവരി 20 6:37:17 AM IST, Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>ൽ എഴുതി
>Hello,
>
>On Wed 19 Jan 2022 at 02:16PM +01, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
>> This question is mostly asked to the backports ftp masters, though
>> anyone voicing an opinion is welcome.
>>
>> I've just uploaded Ceph 16.2.7 to bullseye-backports, as it reached
>> testing. Obviously, this is to allow using the latest version in Stable.
>> However, whenever Ceph Quincy (ie: 17.2.x) will be released, I'm
>> wondering if I should upload it to Unstable. Indeed, Ceph only support
>> skipping a single version. As Bullseye contains 14.2.21, it will only
>> support upgrading to 16.2.x.
>>
>> So, if I am to upload Ceph Quincy (17.x.x, if you're following) whenever
>> it is ready upstream, if Debian is to provide some kind of Stable to
>> Stable+1 path, we must keep somehow a repository for our users to
>> upgrade to 16.2.x, and then I am wondering if, from the
>> bullseye-backports FTP master perspective, it's fine to leave 16.2.x,
>> and never upgrade the backports bullseye-backports to 17.x.x.
>>
>> The challenge here is that Ceph release cycle for 2 releases is a little
>> bit shorter than Debian's 1 release cycle, so the risk is that Debian is
>> always behind, and looses security support.
>
>You'd need the release team's okay too, and based on a previous
>discussion similar to this one, I do not believe they would be on board.
>
>Sorry to hear about this unfortunate situation. Hope something can be
>figured out.
>
If this can't be in backports, another option is fasttrack.debian.net
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Reply to: