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

ClamAV supportability in stable release (was: Unidentified subject!)



Hi all,

(Dared to fix CC/Subject which seemed to be somewhat broken in initial email.)

> The release team have been asked to remove ClamAV from testing (and
> hence the next stable release. See bug #587058.
> 
> The issue seems to be that it's not supportable in stable due to the
> upstream maintainers deciding to upgrade their data files in a way that
> isn't binary compatable with previous versions.
> 
> A couple of options have been mentioned for what to do with this,
> including volatile. I'm opening this mail thread for discussion, and if
> no one comments then I'll go ahead and action the bug report in two
> weeks. For avoidance of doubt, this will also affect reverse
> depends, see dd-list below.
> 

[...]

Has there been feedback other than Christian's idea of adding a
kind-of-transitional package? Speaking as clamav maintainer, we'll happily
continue to upload to unstable, and if migration to testing (and stable) is
permitted - so be it, but the volatile-path seems to be a lot more promising and
future-proof. That said, the clamav ABI/API is surely stabilizing and hence
users of clamav packages from stable might be better off than before. But
there's no guarantee that they really get all the latest&greatest detection
capabilities. 

One clear volatile-only advantage is added cleanliness: No need to mess around
with different versions that actually are the same packages, and it just feels a
lot better if we can have a package in volatile only, and not in unstable as
well.

Best,
Michael

Attachment: pgpUTtsGIvWUH.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: