On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 12:21:53PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > Update security-support-limited from 1:12+2022.08.12 from unstable,
> > thus adding golang and khtml
> > not adding cython, python2.7 and python-stdlib-extensions and mosjs78
> > as they should still be covered.
On 17/08/2022 11:19, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 09:30:03AM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
- today prepare buster branch for release (33% done, see below)
- today until aug 23: possible further updates to the master branch
which then get copied to the buster branch
- aug 23: upl
On Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 09:30:03AM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> - today prepare buster branch for release (33% done, see below)
> - today until aug 23: possible further updates to the master branch
> which then get copied to the buster branch
> - aug 23: upload & SRM bug
> - aug 27: freeze
> - s
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 06:07:14PM +0200, Anton Gladky wrote:
> just to clarify the things. If the "-limited" file will be versioned,
> I think it is better not to include python2.7 or cython
> into the buster-file, as we still support them for buster. But,
> some internal scripts should be modifie
Hi Holger,
just to clarify the things. If the "-limited" file will be versioned,
I think it is better not to include python2.7 or cython
into the buster-file, as we still support them for buster. But,
some internal scripts should be modified in this case to
use the suffix.
If it remains versioned
On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 07:51:56PM +0200, Anton Gladky wrote:
> Regarding your question, if there are not other objections, I would say
> please go ahead with an upload (despite python2.7).
Anton, what do you mean with that python2.7 comment?
pochu also said on irc:
h01ger: I think it makes se
Hi Holger,
thanks for taking care of it!
Regarding your question, if there are not other objections, I would say
please go ahead with an upload (despite python2.7).
Regards
Anton
Am Sa., 13. Aug. 2022 um 11:30 Uhr schrieb Holger Levsen <
hol...@layer-acht.org>:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 12:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 12:06:21PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> yes, I have uploading debian-security-support to buster for the last
> point release on my agenda and will do that upload as needed.
As there has now been a date announced for the final buster point release,
the timeline for this has
On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 03:40:58PM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> I have nothing planned for the immediate future, and the discussion seems to
> have reached consensus, so I think it's good for upload :)
thanks, uploaded.
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducibl
Hi Holger,
On 12/08/2022 14:06, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 02:26:09PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
I see those changes were applied in the master branch. Should they be
backported to the buster branch, with an eventual upload / DLA?
yes, I have uploading debian-secur
On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 02:26:09PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> I see those changes were applied in the master branch. Should they be
> backported to the buster branch, with an eventual upload / DLA?
yes, I have uploading debian-security-support to buster for the last
point release on my
On 10/08/2022 17:10, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
Hi,
On 10/08/2022 11:47, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
On 09/08/2022 19:04, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
Here's a little recap for security-support-ended.deb9 -> deb10 evaluation,
following our discussion, also including dropped entries for
completeness/t
Hi,
On 10/08/2022 11:47, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
On 09/08/2022 19:04, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
Here's a little recap for security-support-ended.deb9 -> deb10
evaluation, following our discussion, also including dropped entries
for completeness/transparency:
Supported again in buster:
-
Hi Sylvain,
On 09/08/2022 19:04, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
Hi,
Here's a little recap for security-support-ended.deb9 -> deb10 evaluation,
following our discussion, also including dropped entries for
completeness/transparency:
Supported again in buster:
- ansible
- chromium
chromium was alre
Hi,
Here's a little recap for security-support-ended.deb9 -> deb10
evaluation, following our discussion, also including dropped entries for
completeness/transparency:
Supported again in buster:
- ansible
- chromium
- keystone [openstack]
- node-.* <-- important
- nodejs <-- important
- pd
On 8/8/22 11:40, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
Thanks for all your inputs. We would certainly welcome instructions
on how to setup a testing OpenStack environment for LTS updates, which
could be documented at https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/TestSuites
Is that what you offered?
I don't think contributors
Hello Moritz,
On 05/08/2022 11:59, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
Am Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:54:28AM +0200 schrieb Sylvain Beucler:
I think the following stretch EOL entries also apply to buster, because the
rationale still applies to the buster versions:
- libspring-java https://lists.debian.org/deb
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:54:28AM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> OpenStack: we tend not to support openstack beyond upstream's support
My statement was influenced by the OpenStack 2020 EOL in jessie:
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/debian-security-support/-/merge_requests/3
"Jessie lost sup
On Aug 5, 2022 13:39, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> If things have stabilized, with fewer issues and a more
> stabilized code, and upstream provides enough information, then I see no
> reason
> why we can't support it.
>
> Cheers,
> Emilio
It really is the case.
At the begining of the p
On 05/08/2022 11:48, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Hello,
On Wed, 03 Aug 2022, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
OpenStack: we tend not to support openstack beyond upstream's support, but
I'm having a hard time associating the components version with OpenStack's
major version; possibly other openstack packages (
Am Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:54:28AM +0200 schrieb Sylvain Beucler:
> Hi,
>
> I think the following stretch EOL entries also apply to buster, because the
> rationale still applies to the buster versions:
> - libspring-java https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts/2021/12/msg8.html
For Spring we need
Am Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 11:48:43AM +0200 schrieb Raphael Hertzog:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 03 Aug 2022, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> > OpenStack: we tend not to support openstack beyond upstream's support, but
> > I'm having a hard time associating the components version with OpenStack's
> > major version
Hello,
On Wed, 03 Aug 2022, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> OpenStack: we tend not to support openstack beyond upstream's support, but
> I'm having a hard time associating the components version with OpenStack's
> major version; possibly other openstack packages (horizon, manila,
> neutron...) are concer
On 8/3/22 11:54, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
OpenStack: we tend not to support openstack beyond upstream's support,
but I'm having a hard time associating the components version with
OpenStack's major version; possibly other openstack packages (horizon,
manila, neutron...) are concerned; see also
h
On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:54:28AM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think the following stretch EOL entries also apply to buster, because the
> rationale still applies to the buster versions:
> - ckeditor3 https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts/2022/05/msg00060.html
> - gpac https://lists.de
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, dem 03.08.2022 um 11:54 +0200 schrieb Sylvain Beucler:
>
>
> This one I'm unsure: Markus, does this apply to a particular ansible
> version, or only stretch's?
> - ansible Lack of an effective test suite makes proper support impossible
I think the test suite in Buster is more
26 matches
Mail list logo
