Re: Bug#797473: frama-c: New upstream version
On 2015-08-31 06:31, David MENTRE wrote:
Hello,
Le 30/08/2015 23:24, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
It seems there is a new upstream version. Could you upload it?
The Sodium version was published in 2nd of February 2015, about 7
months ago.
Debian Jessie has been released during end of April 2015. Updating
Frama-c
before Jessie's release was not an option. We could have uploaded a
version
in experimental but we preferred focus our energy on getting the Jessie
release out.
Frama-C uploads were done rather quickly in the past after a new
upstream
release. What changed is an interest shift from the package maintainer.
I
should have published an RFH or RFA to make it explicit. I originally
planned on updating Frama-C during this summer, but various factors led
me to focus on other areas (more interesting for me). I will eventually
update the package with the newest version, but cannot commit on a date.
For end-user tools when you always need latest version, you'd rather
use another mean that Debian packages: i.e. another distribution (e.g.
Fedora where as far as I know they are up-to-date) or through tool
specific channel on your Debian (e.g. OCaml's opam[1] package
management system, where Frama-C is available in latest version). I'm
using both of them.
I am pretty sure Kurt is not going to use Fedora :-) but he must have
appreciated the suggestion.
For Debian developer: this is not an "angry user rant" but for me a
*structural* limitation of modern Debian unable to provide needs of a
significant part of users[2]. Of course, Debian is fine when you need
a very stable platform where software are not evolving or very slowly
(i.e. server). Even in this case, backports are often needed.
I understand this remark was meant as a constructive criticism, but I
really wonder if it serves any positive goal. Debian provides a highly
customizable high quality platform. Users needing a stable platform
with very latest versions of some software should invest some time to
make that happen. This contributed to the fact that Debian has the
highest
number of derivatives. Sometimes, a new distribution with a more
up-to-date
software stack pops up. But this doesn't come without making some
compromises.
Also, as you pointed out, Debian has some means to get some packages
updated for a stable release through the Backports mechanism. But this
also requires some efforts. Note that anyone can make backports and
publish
them for the common good. It doesn't have to be made by the package
maintainer.
As long as users (with specific needs) keep waiting, you can be sure
that nothing will happen. At least, that's my understanding of Debian's
development model and that's what pushed me to get started and
contributing. And this is not even specific to Debian, but also true
for the wide majority of FLOSS projects out there. The fact that Fedora
has an up-to-date Frama-C package is only explained by the fact that
there
more motivated people (or person?) to keep packaging Frama-C.
If you are concerned about the updateness of the OCaml packages in
Debian,
maybe you could join the team and help? I am pretty sure this will be
more
effective than pointing users to Opam (which is not made for people
looking
for a stable platform, but for developers) or Fedora (which is a
completely
different system).
Kind regards,
--
Mehdi
Reply to: