Re: kernel/d-i/security/release meeting at DebConf6
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 12:04:59PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Sven Luther (firstname.lastname@example.org) [060524 11:52]:
> > On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 11:35:00AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Sven Luther (email@example.com) [060524 11:23]:
> > > > On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 10:31:08AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > > > You are ignoring that we have scheduled a time to update the kernel
> > > > > again before release of etch.
> > > >
> > > > Ah, nice. But would this include an abi-changing kernel upgrade ? I fear not,
> > > > given the trouble of abi changes for security upgrades. In any case, it
> > > > doesn't include an upstream kernel version bump in the planes i have read,
> > > > right ?
> > >
> > > It would even allow a newer minor kernel version, so an abi-change
> > > should be possible as well.
> > Nice then, the question remains of how often and in what timeframe we can do
> > such. Imagine there is a security issue shortly before the release, will we
> > say like last time, let's ship with it, because we have not put into place the
> > procedure to handle it in a timely fashion ?
> There will definitly be a time when it is too late to replace the kernel
> without delaying the release (just consider that we e.g. notice after
> starting the CD build that there is some issue). Also, we need a minimum
> testing periode for the final kernel and the final installer. If we set
> that minimum testing periode to something like 6 weeks (which seems sane
> to me), we cannot update the installer later than mid of October, and
> the kernel needs to be a little bit earlier, which is like the beginning
> of October.
Err, do you really need to retest everything when a kernel change only
includes a small set of security fixes ? I think 6 weeks may be overkill
there, unless naturally you are speaking of a version bump with a huge load of