Hi, just forwardning this from -kernel@ to some more appropriate lists... On Dienstag, 12. Mai 2009, dann frazier wrote: > On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 06:47:13PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > On 2009-05-07, maximilian attems <max@stro.at> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 02:25:25PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > > >> > i would have been happier to push the soon to come 2.6.30 for > > >> > lenny+half, but that looks impossible due to the multiple security > > >> > support that our team currently has to handle going from > > >> > oldstable 2.6.18 and 2.6.24, stable 2.6.26 and of course > > >> > the easy 2.6.29 in sid. > > >> > > >> hm, so do you think lenny+half will not happen or how should I > > >> understand that? I assume it will not be much easier once .30 is in > > >> sid, because 2 months later, there will be .31 in sid and you'd have > > >> to take care for 5 kernel versions again?! > > > > > > the point is that lenny+half is delayed up until manpower is freed > > > by no longer supporting the etch linux-2.6 images. > > > that contradicts somehow the lenny+half intention as by that time > > > typicaly squeeze starts to get mass installed. > > > > Support for etch+half was limited to three months, so ends by 14th > > May. > > My understanding/expectation was that etchnhalf support would > terminate at the same time as etch - and I don't think we communicated > anything to the contrary to our users: > > - http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/2008/msg00003.html > - http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/etchnhalf > > Personally, I view the "nhalf" release as a way to make an old release > viable for a longer period of time - letting change-adverse users > avoid a mass upgrade when they really just need newer hardware. This > class of user isn't looking to migrate to the newest stable release - > they want to stay exactly where they are for as long as they > (reasonable and securely) can. So, for this class of users, the > availability of a usable squeeze isn't really relevant, other than as > a ticking clock for the end of etch support. > > I of course realize that there are other classes of users that may > benefit from an 'nhalf' release (e.g., those who just want latest > stable to work on their hardware), but I'd always assumed this > change-adverse crowd would be the most significant percentage, and > therefore the crowd we'd want to target. Now that etchnhalf has been > out a while, it would be great if we could collect some meaningful > data here.. regards, Holger
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.