Bug#728347: On packaging Mediawiki 1.23 for Debian jessie

[Yongmin Hong]

The upstream support for mediawiki 1.19 was dropped by May 2015.

Sent from iPhone
https://revi.me
GPG KeyID: 0xbeff197a

2014. 11. 14. 05:23 Salvatore Bonaccorso  작성:

> Hi all,
> 
>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 01:04:35PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> Hi Thorsten
>> 
>> Op vrijdag 26 september 2014 15:28:55 schreef Thorsten Glaser:
>>> Failure to do so will mean shipping Mediawiki 1.19 in
>>> jessie, which is currently upstream’s oldstable and
>>> fading LTS. Mediawiki 1.23 is upstream’s current LTS;
>>> we have an agreement from upstream to support 1.19 for
>>> the lifetime of wheezy, and I guess they’d be willing
>>> to extend the same for 1.23 and jessie, but I’d not
>>> want to ask them to do that for 1.19. The delivery of
>>> the security updates from upstream to Debian (both
>>> stable and unstable) has been good so far, with only
>>> a few minor bumps on the road (releases come out when
>>> I go to bed, roughly, and I do not always have time,
>>> and certain people submit unwanted bugreports about
>>> new versions nobody asked for), and no concerns from
>>> the stable-security team so far, so it’s been productive.
>> 
>> Agreed; I think it's required that we ship 1.23 in Jessie in order to keep 
>> the 
>> current security support strategy sustainable. So this needs to happen.
>> 
>>> If anyone’s got a rough overview of what changed between
>>> 1.19 and 1.23 for/from a packager’s PoV, thank you for
>>> pointing it out to me.
>> 
>> I cannot help you with testing the packages since I do not use them.
>> However, I'm maintaining one large Mediawiki installation which for
>> hysterical reasons does not use the package, and I can say that
>> upgrading from 1.19 to 1.23 was easy and didn't require any
>> infrastructural changes. So I'm rather confident that this will also
>> not present large issues in the packaging.
> 
> Going through some older mails I noticed this thread again. We
> unfortunately are now defintively late for mediawiki 1.23 for Jessie.
> Do we know something about the remaining time upstream will support
> 1.19? Is it realistic that we could for the jessie cycle be able to
> support this version (and does it actually makes sense?).
> 
> Just a bunch of question, for which I don't have a clear answer.
> Removing mediawiki for jessie also does possibly not really seem to be
> an option.
> 
> Regards,
> Salvatore
> 

Bug#728347: On packaging Mediawiki 1.23 for Debian jessie

[Yongmin Hong]

MediaWiki 1.19's LTS support will end at May 2015, according to the mw.org [1].

[1]: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki_1.19
--
Yongmin Hong [Revi]
[[mw:User:-revi]]
GPG fingerprint: 72595467101410C3DBF2899FCFAB84B9E7BBAB4A
Sent from Android


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#728347: On packaging Mediawiki 1.23 for Debian jessie

[Salvatore Bonaccorso]

Hi all,

On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 01:04:35PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
 Hi Thorsten
 
 Op vrijdag 26 september 2014 15:28:55 schreef Thorsten Glaser:
  Failure to do so will mean shipping Mediawiki 1.19 in
  jessie, which is currently upstream’s oldstable and
  fading LTS. Mediawiki 1.23 is upstream’s current LTS;
  we have an agreement from upstream to support 1.19 for
  the lifetime of wheezy, and I guess they’d be willing
  to extend the same for 1.23 and jessie, but I’d not
  want to ask them to do that for 1.19. The delivery of
  the security updates from upstream to Debian (both
  stable and unstable) has been good so far, with only
  a few minor bumps on the road (releases come out when
  I go to bed, roughly, and I do not always have time,
  and certain people submit unwanted bugreports about
  new versions nobody asked for), and no concerns from
  the stable-security team so far, so it’s been productive.
 
 Agreed; I think it's required that we ship 1.23 in Jessie in order to keep 
 the 
 current security support strategy sustainable. So this needs to happen.
 
  If anyone’s got a rough overview of what changed between
  1.19 and 1.23 for/from a packager’s PoV, thank you for
  pointing it out to me.
 
 I cannot help you with testing the packages since I do not use them.
 However, I'm maintaining one large Mediawiki installation which for
 hysterical reasons does not use the package, and I can say that
 upgrading from 1.19 to 1.23 was easy and didn't require any
 infrastructural changes. So I'm rather confident that this will also
 not present large issues in the packaging.

Going through some older mails I noticed this thread again. We
unfortunately are now defintively late for mediawiki 1.23 for Jessie.
Do we know something about the remaining time upstream will support
1.19? Is it realistic that we could for the jessie cycle be able to
support this version (and does it actually makes sense?).

Just a bunch of question, for which I don't have a clear answer.
Removing mediawiki for jessie also does possibly not really seem to be
an option.

Regards,
Salvatore


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#728347: On packaging Mediawiki 1.23 for Debian jessie

[Miguel Figueiredo]

Hi all,

i have a small personal wiki with MySQL.
I can test the upgrade on my wiki / install a new wiki on a VM and share 
feedback.



--
Melhores cumprimentos/Best regards,

Miguel Figueiredo


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#728347: On packaging Mediawiki 1.23 for Debian jessie

[Thijs Kinkhorst]

Hi Thorsten

Op vrijdag 26 september 2014 15:28:55 schreef Thorsten Glaser:
 Failure to do so will mean shipping Mediawiki 1.19 in
 jessie, which is currently upstream’s oldstable and
 fading LTS. Mediawiki 1.23 is upstream’s current LTS;
 we have an agreement from upstream to support 1.19 for
 the lifetime of wheezy, and I guess they’d be willing
 to extend the same for 1.23 and jessie, but I’d not
 want to ask them to do that for 1.19. The delivery of
 the security updates from upstream to Debian (both
 stable and unstable) has been good so far, with only
 a few minor bumps on the road (releases come out when
 I go to bed, roughly, and I do not always have time,
 and certain people submit unwanted bugreports about
 new versions nobody asked for), and no concerns from
 the stable-security team so far, so it’s been productive.

Agreed; I think it's required that we ship 1.23 in Jessie in order to keep the 
current security support strategy sustainable. So this needs to happen.

 If anyone’s got a rough overview of what changed between
 1.19 and 1.23 for/from a packager’s PoV, thank you for
 pointing it out to me.

I cannot help you with testing the packages since I do not use them. However, 
I'm maintaining one large Mediawiki installation which for hysterical reasons 
does not use the package, and I can say that upgrading from 1.19 to 1.23 was 
easy and didn't re  quire any infrastructural changes. So I'm rather 
confident 
that this will also not present large issues in the packaging.


Cheers,
Thijs


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#728347: On packaging Mediawiki 1.23 for Debian jessie

[Thorsten Glaser]

Hi everyone,

I can possibly work up to about four person-days within the
next four weeks on this, pending an OK from the project lead
of my current for-customer project on Monday. I’ve asked for
this since nobody else is apparently working on it, and we
use Mediawiki in our inhouse FusionForge installations anyway.

I expect we will have to update:

• src:mediawiki
• all extensions
  – src:mediawiki-extensions
  – maybe src:mediawiki-math
  – maybe php-wikidiff2
• src:fusionforge

From the FusionForge weekly IRC meeting today, I expect to
see FusionForge 5.3 in Debian jessie. Roland and Sylvain,
please do not upload anything to Debian sid which you do
not want to see in jessie, from now, so I can work with
sid to make FusionForge match Mediawiki. (This means to
please not package FusionForge 5.4/6.0 for Debian until
this is finished, and to possibly help me with testing
and hacking the ff-plugin-mw integration.)

I’ll look at src:mediawiki-extensions, although I cannot
test all extensions. I’ll not look at php-wikidiff2.

This means that, once I prepare new packages (starting
in experimental, I think), I will need volunteer testing
and feedback, from admins as well as actual users. We
are on a very tight timeframe, and I wish to have this
all finished within the next 28 days, starting Monday.

Failure to do so will mean shipping Mediawiki 1.19 in
jessie, which is currently upstream’s oldstable and
fading LTS. Mediawiki 1.23 is upstream’s current LTS;
we have an agreement from upstream to support 1.19 for
the lifetime of wheezy, and I guess they’d be willing
to extend the same for 1.23 and jessie, but I’d not
want to ask them to do that for 1.19. The delivery of
the security updates from upstream to Debian (both
stable and unstable) has been good so far, with only
a few minor bumps on the road (releases come out when
I go to bed, roughly, and I do not always have time,
and certain people submit unwanted bugreports about
new versions nobody asked for), and no concerns from
the stable-security team so far, so it’s been productive.

Everyone who’s relying on Mediawiki in Debian should
consider agreeing to help test it and drop me an eMail
(to this my work address) stating so.

If anyone’s got a rough overview of what changed between
1.19 and 1.23 for/from a packager’s PoV, thank you for
pointing it out to me.

Let me reiterate a bit of what I normally test:

Mediawiki not stand-alone, but in a multi-site scenario,
with FusionForge replacing a bit of its theme (we use
Monobook) and about all of its auth mechanisms, and
PostgreSQL as the database, plus most of the extensions
from src:mediawiki-extensions, plus src:mediawiki-math.

I have no experience in setting up a standalone mediawiki
(and do not particularily wish to gain that), and I will
absolutely not touch MySQL, which is what upstream recommends
in lieu of a database. This means I test a very non-default
setup. Our inhouse FusionForge is 5.1-based, but for Debian
I’ll also test with the 5.3 from jessie/sid/experimental.

I’m not formally the maintainer of src:mediawiki (only of
src:mediawiki-extensions, and even then only a comaintainer),
but considering that one of them doesn’t do it either, and
the other’s got a bouncing eMail address, I’m willing to
step forward and do my share of the work.

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
tarent solutions GmbH
Rochusstraße 2-4, D-53123 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Tel: +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB 5168 (AG Bonn) • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org