On 11/24/23 21:41, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 12:20:53AM -0600, Aaron Rainbolt wrote:
SRUs in packages used by flavors (including flavor-specific packages) are
also common.
Speaking as a member of the SRU Team as well, I don't actually see evidence
of this. There has been a run of SRUs right at the time of the mantic
release, related to release upgrades; and there was also a recent Lubuntu
SRU to lunar to fix *notifications* for release upgrades; but I can't think
of any other examples in the past few years. This might be because it
happened that all of them were processed by other members of the SRU Team,
but that's statistically unlikely. From my perspective, SRUs of core
packages in main are much more common. Can you point to something I've
missed showing that flavor package SRUs are happening?
There are at least two high-profile fixes done in Lubuntu 22.04 via SRU,
both of which were accepted by Chris Halse Rogers (RAOF).
There was a Calamares version update done via SRU in Lubuntu 22.04:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/calamares/+bug/1992507
There was an SRU for a highly problematic updater bug for Lubuntu 22.04
that resulted in freezes when running updates and update notices not
appearing anymore after an interrupted update (not do-release-upgrades,
just normal package updates):
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lubuntu-update-notifier/+bug/2002255
tjaalton also helped out with an SRU for an updater problem when
packages were to be removed:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lubuntu-update-notifier/+bug/2012823
Together with the two SRUs you noted, this is at least *five* bugfixes
pushed through by the Lubuntu team into the LTS over a year-and-a-half
period, to keep the LTS working well for our end-users.(There may be
even more I'm not aware of or don't remember, the ones I listed are just
ones that were easy for me to remember and/or find.)
We also maintain a Backports PPA for newer versions on LXQt for 22.04,
which can be enabled by users manually via add-apt-repository (it's not
enabled by default and never will be per TB policy). This involves
backporting the entire LXQt stack to Jammy to help our users have a
better experience with the LTS if they have to use the LTS and don't
want to use interim releases. Ubuntu Studio has a similar Backports
repository delivered via a PPA for some of the software it ships.
Kubuntu also has something similar for newer versions of KDE on 22.04.
These are non-trivial to implement and take a significant amount of work
to make sure that our users have what they need and want in the LTS. I
would consider this a form of support, and while I don't believe such
repositories should be necessary to qualify for LTS status, it should be
noted that it's something we do. We put a lot of effort into keeping the
LTS releases working well.
Aaron
(I think this is very relevant to the question of LTS qualification, because
demonstrating a track record of active maintenance of the stable release of
a flavor goes a long way to establishing that the flavor team is delivering
something that meets users' needs for an LTS.)
--
Aaron Rainbolt
Lubuntu Developer
Matrix: @arraybolt3:matrix.org
IRC: arraybolt3 on irc.libera.chat
GitHub:https://github.com/ArrayBolt3
--
technical-board mailing list
technical-board@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
