Re: Plan B for kfreebsd
Hello,
2014-11-11 14:41 GMT+01:00 Steven Chamberlain <steven@pyro.eu.org>:
> Peter Palfrader wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Nov 2014, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Anyway, I'm really hopeful now. weasel suggested a 'jessie-kfreebsd'
> suite could still be supported by FTP team. (Actually, could that be
> named something more generic like jessie-ports? So that another arch
> can try something similar? Or would it be confused too much with
> debian-ports.org?)
>
> Porters would try to maintain it like a stable release. Perhaps able
> to do make improvements that release team policy might not have allowed;
> like backporting something that particularly benefits that arch.
> Practically it would be an 'official Debian port', and we'd have all the
> usual things like install media.
>
> If it turns out to be in fact stable, hopefully it would be acceptable
> to DSA. The remaining obstacles go away. It sounds sustainable, and
> seems like a model for other ports to follow.
I have been thinking adding stable to debian-ports would be great for
these kind of cases, but still there are many open ends:
* Need for unreleased-stable suite
* Keep up with security maintenance
* Keep up with point releases
* Handling transitions in acceptable time (not directly affecting
stable release)
* Handle migrations between unstable -> stable(?) suites
All that, and maybe more, without release, security, buildd, dsa team support.
Not trivial stuff to do, but that might not only help the kfreebsd but
all the other debian-ports arches to get an unofficial stable release.
Regards,
--
Héctor Orón -.. . -... .. .- -. -.. . ...- . .-.. --- .--. . .-.
Reply to: