Web lists-archives.com

Re: Extended Long Term Support for Wheezy

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:48:43PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 14954 March 1977, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > - for ftpmasters, can we keep wheezy/updates on security.debian.org for
> >   one year more?  (it might be possible to archive wheezy and drop it from
> >   the main mirror, that would be a clear sign to everybody that something
> >   important changed, and we could reconfigure the buildd to use another
> >   repository)
> No.
> > - are there other problems related to this extended LTS that need to be
> >   discussed?
> If this would be "just" extending the current LTS ways for more time,
> then it would be OKish to stay on donated, voluntarily managed,
> infrastructure. After all it helps all users of wheezy with updates,
> nominally over all of wheezy.
> But the proposal is effectively just for a benefit of a few paying
> customers, with a very selected set of packages and architectures, all
> the rest lost out. Thats not ok to ask volunteers to support, nor
> is it ok to use projects infrastructure for. The companies that want it,
> should run it.

Maybe the proposal needs to be clarified, but my understanding was that
some companies are willing to fund a longer LTS for a restricted set of
packages and architectures¹, but that the product of that would continue
to be available for anyone.

I assume that Raphael knows that it wouldn't even make sense to ask if
that could be done in Debian infrastructure if it wasn't available to
all users.

¹ LTS is _already_ for a restricted set of packages and architectures,
  so this is just extra constraining to allow for longer support

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature