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

Re: Longer maintainance for (former) stable releases of Debian (Re: Dreamhost dumps Debian)

On 08/27/2013 11:53 AM, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Michael Meskes <meskes@debian.org
> <mailto:meskes@debian.org>> wrote:
>     > Guys, if you want it to happen, raise your hands *now* like
>     Gustavo did.
>     > Otherwise, please everyone: let this thread die and never raise the
>     > topic again in this list.
>     Raising my hand here ...
> One more hand. 

Cool, thanks. So, we are now 4, I think that's good enough to plan on
doing something.

> But I'd like to stress we need *all* developers to be involved fix bugs
> (esp. security) in their packages in all the supported releases, not
> only in current-stable. Having a team of people like Mike, Michael,
> Gustavo, me, etc to take care of EVERY package is plain impossible,
> especially if we want 5 years support for the *whole* archive

That's not my plan. My plan is to do as much as we can for the packages
we care about. For example, I need security updates for bind9, apache2,
postfix and such. I'm not interested at all in doing any Desktop
software maintenance (my laptop is using at least Stable, and sometimes
testing (when close to a release)).

> Ubuntu did a smart move in regards to support when it split the archive
> in main/universe/multiverse and decided to support only main).

I don't see any smartness when declaring that things are "community
maintained" (eg: the work is done in Debian, and sync if we ask...).
It's just that they decided not to take responsibility for part of the
archive. What we could do, would be to track what needs to be patched
and what has already been fixed. If our users have a clear list of what
is maintained or not, then that's enough to me.

On 08/27/2013 12:03 PM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> I am afraid I am not on board for this. I do not agree with requiring
> me to support old software for years and years after I've stopped
> using it.

I don't think anyone wants to *require* this from anyone. At least
that's not my plan.

> It is not something that interests me as a technical
> challenge; instead the task is tedious and boring.

I agree, it's boring and not interesting. Though I need it for my
company online services, and so does a lot of people. My idea is just to
gather workforces of those who do it privately (like some already
reported in this thread) and put that in a single (trusted) repository,
then see how it goes. If it gains traction after Squeeze is EOL, then we
can push the idea further and make it more official, after Wheezy is EOL.



Reply to: