[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Is Eucalyptus upstream dead?



On 9/4/19 7:23 AM, kuLa wrote:
> On 2019-09-03 13:50:41, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 10:24:24AM +0100, kuLa wrote:
>>>> on my side I would have no objections with a removal.
>>>
>>> Should we actively ask for removal or wait till normal bugs will become RC and
>>> removal for all py2 packages is going to be compulsory?
>>> I personally am ok with both.
>>
>> In my experience, early removal is preferable. It gives users an
>> indication that they should be looking for alternatives now, while
>> things are still reasonably safe to use. They can migrate in their own
>> time frame. Whereas if we wait until a (possibly security related) RC
>> bug, the transition is much more abrupt for the users.
> 
> I think above adheres to 'fail quickly' idea which I like,
> In such case I think we should request removal of euca2ools from sid and
> testing soon.

Yes.

> 
>> The big question to me is whether the packages should be removed from
>> (old)stable. In general, I'd say yes for the same reasons as above. By
>> keeping the packages in the archive, we are presenting a level of
>> support for them that we may not actually be prepared to meet.
> 
> I'm not convinced that removal from stable (even more from oldstable) is a good
> idea. It's going to disrupt functionality of the systems for users and create
> unexpected (in stable) pain point. As far as I know python2 will be supported
> by Debian through the Buster life cycle thus py2 tolls should operate fairly
> securely as long as Buster is supported.

Agreed. There's no good reason to remove it from Buster.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)


Reply to: