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

Bug#863259: marked as done (document that jessie2stretch upgrades need to involve backports if django is upgraded)

Your message dated Sat, 3 Jun 2017 15:49:15 +0300
with message-id <20170603124915.7ndaztn6ucknnxov@localhost>
and subject line lava-server seems to be a (fixed) special case
has caused the Debian Bug report #863259,
regarding document that jessie2stretch upgrades need to involve backports if django is upgraded
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
863259: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=863259
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
package: release-notes
x-debbugs-cc: codehelp@debian.org, debian-backports@lists.debian.org

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 02:53:00PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
[...about python-django]
> Agreed. 1.8 *must* remain available. The only supportable route
> otherwise is to push 1.8 into jessie.
>  
> > Upgrading from 1.7 in Jessie to 1.10 is highly likely to break user
> > code (even if it doesn't break things in the archive).
> 
> 1.8 is a *mandatory* step to get to 1.10 - packages using databases
> *cannot* upgrade from 1.7 to 1.10 or 1.11 without going via a new
> release in backports which requires >= 1.8 and then to 1.10 or 1.11.
> 
> We've had exactly this problem with lava-server.
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=847277
> 
> Upgrades from developer versions of django *must* go via the
> intermediate django LTS. LTS versions can then upgrade to a developer
> version or to the next LTS.
> 
> This upgrade path is completely broken in django:
> 
> 1.7 -> 1.9 | 1.10 | 1.11
> 
> This upgrade path is required for all packages depending on django in
> jessie:
> 
> 1.7 -> 1.8 -> 1.9 | 1.10 | 1.11
> 
> Critically, at the point where 1.8 is installed a *new upstream
> release* of that dependency needs to be co-installed to use the
> functionality in 1.8 and this upgrade *must* complete before 1.9 or
> later can be installed.
> 
> Debian released jessie with 1.7 and that is the source of all these
> problems. 1.7 is a developer release - it's a bit of a dead end as far
> as upgrades are concerned. 1.7 can only be upgraded to 1.8, no further.
> 1.8 can then be upgraded to the next LTS or developer releases in
> between.
> 
> > Removal would be better.  If we can't fix 1.8, we should just get rid
> > of the backport.
> 
> Removing the django backport forces the removal of the dependencies
> that would be broken by letting in 1.10 so what on earth is gained by
> doing that?
> 
> Policy is not a stick to bash developers or users. 1.8 needs to stay
> available in backports at all costs.
> 
> Anything else makes backports completely unusable. More than that, it
> makes all packages depending on django in *stretch* RC buggy. So
> removing 1.8 from jessie-backports would directly cause the removal of
> dozens of packages from testing and unstable.
> 
> Packages already in jessie-backports *depend* on python-django >= 1.8
> and can no longer work with 1.7.
> 
> Removal of 1.8 is *not* an option at any cost.

If this indeed is the case and stays the case we ought to document this in 
the release notes, to minimize the number of users suffering data loss on a
broken upgrade from jessie to stretch…

(I'm neither convinced this upgrade path is the best we can do nor do
I know anything about the state of django in Debian. So please don't cc:
me, I'm just the clueless messanger trying to make sure this situation
gets at least noted in the release notes.)


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
As far as I understand it, lava-server was a special case with a problem 
that is now fixed/workarounded in both lava-serber (#847277 fixed in 2016.12-2) 
and python-django (#863267 to be released in 1:1.10.7-2) and there is
no problem left that has to be documented in the release notes.

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

--- End Message ---
Reply to: