Re: support for etchanhalf for how long?
Holger Levsen wrote:
> 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..
I also thought that etchnhalf would be supported as long as etch would
get supported. It's also way too late to change that expectation from
users IMHO.
Cheers
Luk
Reply to: