Re: Longer maintainance for (former) stable releases of Debian (Re: Dreamhost dumps Debian)
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 07:52:33PM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> I don't really understand it myself as server packages and their
> dependencies tend to be stable and I tend to want the latest versions of
> dovecot, unbound etc..
>
> However perhaps there is a divide here between servers which want longer
> support for few packages and desktops which want stable but secure yet
> as featureful as is sensible desktops.
I think you have a very valid point here. I kind of doubt many people would
like to run on a five year old desktop.
Anyhow, I doubt we can reasonably expect to maintain *all* packages for a longer
period. How about starting with a defined list of packages that we do care
about in an LTS? I would start with just the basic system and the most
important server packages.
I wonder whether it makes sense to align our LTS with others, let's say
Ubuntu, to reduce the workload for both sides?
Finally what do we do with packages that are no longer supported by upstream?
Do we essantially take over or do we restrict updates for as long as upstream
provides fixes?
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL
Reply to: