On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 09:44:28PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 01:33:05 AM Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > ... > > * optional newer versions of major, fast-moving and important platform > > components. For example, during the life of 12.04 LTS we are > > providing as optional updates newer versions of OpenStack, so it is > > always possible to deploy 12.04 LTS with the latest OpenStack in a > > supported configuration, and upgrade to newer versions of OpenStack > > in existing clouds without upgrading from 12.04 LTS itself. > ... > > On this one point, I'd like to mention that "optional newer version of ... " > is exactly what we've oriented backports towards. Since we've implemented > the > NotAutomatic feature (I think it was Maverick, but definitely before Precise) > we can put newer versions of packages into backports and users only get the > newer version when they request it. > > I believe that we have infrastructure and process largely in place to address > this point already.
Natty, AFAIK. I'm not sure our current process is up to scratch for packages with large numbers of rdeps. We can talk about this. I believe that with some investment (in people), backports could be used to significantly better effect than it is currently. Oh, and this bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/888665 Cheers, -- Iain Lane [ i...@orangesquash.org.uk ] Debian Developer [ la...@debian.org ] Ubuntu Developer [ la...@ubuntu.com ]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- technical-board mailing list technical-board@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
