On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:55:25AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 09:54:27PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > Are you suggesting that it should be possible to store our own data
> > > in another git repository and that the
Hi,
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > - for buildd/DSA teams, can we keep wheezy buildds (only amd64/i386 has
> > been requested so far) for one year more?
>
> I don't think DSA is thrilled about committing to keep anything other
> than amd64 for anything longer than was already
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 09:54:27PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Are you suggesting that it should be possible to store our own data
> > in another git repository and that the tracker should be easily able to
> > merge the data coming from two
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> - for buildd/DSA teams, can we keep wheezy buildds (only amd64/i386 has
> been requested so far) for one year more?
I don't think DSA is thrilled about committing to keep anything other
than amd64 for anything longer than was already promised.
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 09:54:27PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Are you suggesting that it should be possible to store our own data
> in another git repository and that the tracker should be easily able to
> merge the data coming from two distincts repositories ?
I've got patches somewhere
On Sun, 25 Feb 2018, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> The security tracker is fairly flexible and it should take little
> effort to setup a separate instance which is based on the main
> data/our triage efforts while acting on a local Packages file.
>
> Ideally document this process publicly, so that
On Thursday 22 February 2018 09:01 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, Geert Stappers wrote:
>> But what is "CIP"?
>>
>> My websearch did bring up "Clean In Place" and "Christelijk Intromatie
>> Platform" ...
>
> It was explained in my first mail.
>
> Civil
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 07:05:52PM +0100, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> The security tracker is fairly flexible and it should take little
> effort to setup a separate instance which is based on the main
> data/our triage efforts while acting on a local Packages file.
>
> Ideally document this
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:57:07PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> But assuming that we keep updates hosted on some debian.org host, do you
> think it's OK to continue to use the security tracker to track
> vulnerabilities in wheezy?
Need to be discussed with the rest of the team, I'm not really
Le jeudi, 22 février 2018, 19.44:06 h CET Roberto C. Sánchez a écrit :
> If we are going to start applying this sort of logic to naming, then
> there are plenty of other places (e.g., where actual vulgarities are
> used in package names, where abreviations and/or acronyms create words
> that are
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 07:31:23PM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> Le mardi, 20 février 2018, 16.07:03 h CET Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> > ("super long-term maintenance", SLTS in their jargon)
>
> A small point, but I haven't seen anyone mention it yet: I would not use the
> 'slts' acronym,
Le mardi, 20 février 2018, 16.07:03 h CET Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> ("super long-term maintenance", SLTS in their jargon)
A small point, but I haven't seen anyone mention it yet: I would not use the
'slts' acronym, basically anywhere, as it is very close to the 'sluts' smear
word.
Cheers,
Hi Raphael
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:57:07PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > I would however suggest that it should not be part of the normal mirror
> > area, since:
> Ack on all this. That's why I suggested to keep only the part on
> security.debian.org and drop the part on the main mirror.
On Thu, 2018-02-22 at 16:51 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> > I don't have an opinion on whether this should be done on Debian
> > servers or not, but I have a comment on providing security support for
> > more than a decade. How do you plan to
Hi,
On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> I don't have an opinion on whether this should be done on Debian
> servers or not, but I have a comment on providing security support for
> more than a decade. How do you plan to deal with the kernel?
FTR, I'm not involved in CIP and thus I can't
On Thu, 2018-02-22 at 16:31 +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> I don't have an opinion on whether this should be done on Debian
> servers or not, but I have a comment on providing security support for
> more than a decade. How do you plan to deal with the kernel? Do you
> expect to backport security
Hello,
On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, Geert Stappers wrote:
> But what is "CIP"?
>
> My websearch did bring up "Clean In Place" and "Christelijk Intromatie
> Platform" ...
It was explained in my first mail.
Civil Infrastructure Platform
https://www.cip-project.org/
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian
On 2018-02-22 at 09:45, Geert Stappers wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:57:07PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, Philip Hands wrote:
>>
>>> I'm in favour of making it possible for our users to build
>>> structures that enable longer support periods if that's what they
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:57:07PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> > LTS has a clearly defined scope, while this is essentially contracting
> > work to extend the life time of some packages for some customers.
> >
> > I don't see a
I don't have an opinion on whether this should be done on Debian
servers or not, but I have a comment on providing security support for
more than a decade. How do you plan to deal with the kernel? Do you
expect to backport security fixes to the wheezy kernel, or upgrade the
kernel to newer
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:48:43PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
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.
Hello,
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> LTS has a clearly defined scope, while this is essentially contracting
> work to extend the life time of some packages for some customers.
>
> I don't see a compelling reason for it to run on Debian infrastructure.
This was also my first
* Philip Hands: " Re: Extended Long Term Support for Wheezy" (Thu, 22 Feb 2018
08:46:16 +0100):
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
> > On Feb 21, Antonio Terceiro <terce...@debian.org> wrote:
> >
> [...]
> > Indeed. I
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
> On Feb 21, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
>
>> 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
On Feb 21, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> 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
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
On 02/20/2018 04:52 PM, Jens Korte wrote:
> Hi
>
> How would you organize and call it in the wiki name space, ELTS,
> extended LTS, LTS? Would you use the normal LTS name space and make no
> difference? LTS is on the one side the name for the support after
> oldstable and on the other side the
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
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 22:42:46 +0100, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > some of the LTS sponsors are looking to extend the support period of
> > Debian 7 Wheezy (from a few months up to a full year).
> >
> > Our question is whether this can be done on debian.org
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> some of the LTS sponsors are looking to extend the support period of
> Debian 7 Wheezy (from a few months up to a full year).
>
> Our question is whether this can be done on debian.org infrastructure.
LTS has a clearly defined scope, while this is essentially contracting
Hi
How would you organize and call it in the wiki name space, ELTS,
extended LTS, LTS? Would you use the normal LTS name space and make no
difference? LTS is on the one side the name for the support after
oldstable and on the other side the general name for LTS and ELTS.
Greets
Jens Korte
Am
[ Bcc to ftpmasters, wanna-build team, DSA team, LTS team, security team
to catch their attention ]
Hello,
some of the LTS sponsors are looking to extend the support period of
Debian 7 Wheezy (from a few months up to a full year). Some of the LTS
sponsors (notably Plat'Home, Toshiba) are also
32 matches
Mail list logo