Re: What to do when DD considers policy to be optional? [kubernetes]
On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 08:47:16 +0200, Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org>
wrote:
>On 4/8/20 10:44 PM, Peter Silva wrote:
>> doesn´t this whole discussion just mean that k8 should just not be in
>> Debian?
>
>IMO no. It means that if we have enough packaging resources (which
>probably we don't, I can't tell),
We don't. That's the problem: We might have the personpower to
_PACKAGE_ a monster like openstack, docker or k2s, but we definetely
dont have the resources to actually SUPPORT the software for the
entire stable-oldstable etc lifecycle. We NEED upstream support for
that, and if we even don't have that right after our release (when the
software is already half a year old), then we are not doing ourselves
and our users a favor by providing packages at all.
>As a user, I'd prefer Kubernets to be in Stable if possible. I'd be one
>of these users who don't care about the latest shiny feature, and prefer
>something stable, supported for YEARS to come, not just 3 months.
That a big package in Debian stable that has been abandoned by
upstream months or even years ago is actually supported is fairy tale.
You're lying to yourself if you believe that you'd get full security
support for a two years old kubernetes release in Debian stable.
The utmost you'd get would be an occasional security fix where an
upstream fix would get _flagged_ as security relevant _AND_
coincidentially backportable to our version.
Greetings
Marc
--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Reply to: