Re: Future of the linux udebs
Frederik Schueler <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:31:05PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> Bastian Blank <email@example.com> writes:
>>> - Is impossible to release d-i with a different kernel from sid
>>> without a lot of hassle
>>> - If a bad kernel, with a bunch of ugly bugs, gets uploaded, all d-i
>>> development is affected
>> This last item is where I worry a lot. Obviously, kernel team want to
>> put newest kernel on sid however, when he does it, d-i will be forced
>> to change it too.
> Coordination is already needed now, and will be needed even more when
> this change is implemented.
> If this means waiting with a new upstream kernel version for a week or
> two until the next beta of d-i is done, we will of course wait, no one
> wants to break d-i development by purpose.
Exactly however for that to work we, d-i team, need to be able to nack
a kernel upload.
Please read the thread we had about 2.6.24 kernel testing
migration... this is what worries me.
>> For it to work testing images, _before_ the kernel
>> upload to happen, would be required to at least reduce the risk of a
>> kernel upload to stop all d-i development until it gets fixed.
> We have the kernel-snapshots archive to test new images before uploading
> them. This infrastructure could be extended, by adding buildds for all
> missing architectures, and whatever else is needed to get daily d-i
> snapshots built with these kernels.
Yes, that's one thing that do like. This would allow us to have a
current d-i image and one using the next kernel, just released.
>> Another thihk that I see as a _must_ is that d-i team could nack a
>> kernel upload. This is requred since d-i won't be allowed to diverge
>> from sid kernels anymore (I mean during development) and those
>> migrations would need to be much more coordinated with d-i RM and d-i
> Nobody will insist on uploading a new kernel version if this breaks the
> release schedule, just think of 2.6.19, which never was uploaded to the
> archive because we where in the middle of releasing etch.
I guess so but we had a hard time about 2.6.24.
This needs to get an agreement from both sides to be able to work.
I personally have a good relation with all active people in
debian-kernel but I think that we might have a "policy" to avoid
problems to happen. Good will isn't enough, IMO.
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br
"Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives
you the whole house."