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

Re: usrmerge -- plan B?

Russ Allbery writes ("Re: usrmerge -- plan B?"):
> Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> > We can then have this discussion again early in the bullseye release
> > cycle.  If we must.
> That idea makes me wince.  This will just result in the same thing
> happening again.  Let's have the discussion *now*, when the problems are
> fresh in our mind, and then defer *action* to early in the bullseye
> release cycle (which I suspect is likely to happen anyway given how long
> it usually takes us to sort through questions of large migrations like
> this).

If we *are* to have this discussion now, we still need a transition

Adam has presented a sketch of one; it would have to be fleshed out
further, addressing issues that have been raised (eg, dependency
handling) so that we could do a more detailed technical review, before
we could adopt it.

The `install usrmerge package everywhere' transition plan is still
missing.  The next thing its proponents ought to do is to write a
proper transition plan, covering all of the details, so that we can
review it.  The transition plan should cover all aspects, including
for example the implications for dpkg (see Guillem's mail); whether
the transition might be reverted on an individual system; go / no-go
decision points; etc.


Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Reply to: