couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Bisbee <...@sbisbee.com>
Subject Re: backport of couchdb
Date Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:36:14 GMT
Sorry, I wasn't clear enough with the productivity stuff. I was trying
to drive more at the LTS issues. Debian essentially believes that
everything introduced into their repos is LTS whereas CouchDB doesn't
consider every version to be supported for 1yr +. The productivity bit
was more "CouchDB releases more often than Debian".

Or maybe CouchDB does consider their versions to be supported for 1yr
+? I vaguely recall support time lines being discussed years ago.

As for the back porting, Debian doesn't directly manage any packages.
Everything has a package maintainer who may or may not be part of the
Debian staff, so it really does land on the maintainer. And I don't
see how you could back port fixes from, say, 1.x.x to 0.x.x.

Cheers,

--
Sam Bisbee

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Noah Slater <nslater@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> I don't think there's as much of a conflict as you are making out. CouchDB
> is actually a fairly slow moving project. One the things
> regularly levelled against us is that we don't release more often. So I am
> not prepared to accept that CouchDB is some how unusually active in
> comparison to other Debian projects. As for back porting security fixes, if
> the project itself is not prepared to do that, then it becomes the package
> maintainers responsibility. So that would require some knowledge of Erlang,
> I guess.
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Sam Bisbee <sam@sbisbee.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Noah Slater <nslater@tumbolia.org>
>> wrote:
>> > Copying in the CouchDB developer list.
>> >
>> > I have not done any work for Debian for a number of years now. People
>> have,
>> > on occasion, said that they were interested in taking up the CouchDB
>> > packaging work. I guess that never happened. Is anyone else prepared to
>> > step up here?
>>
>> I was for a long time. Many reasons for why I left, including...
>>
>> > We'll be releasing CouchDB 1.2.0 soon, and it would be super awesome if
>> > that ended up in Debian shortly after.
>>
>> The long and short of it is that Debian does not want versions of
>> packages to be added to its repository that will not be supported over
>> the long term. This is their policy and should be respected,
>> regardless of your feelings about it (political patches welcome?).
>>
>> The problem is that CouchDB is a productive project. Releases come out
>> at regular intervals and very old versions are usually not supported.
>> For example, I doubt anyone thought 0.11.0 would be a LTS version, but
>> it made it into Debian stable. Now Debian's expectation is that
>> critical and security patches would be back ported to it from new
>> versions instead of pushing new versions of CouchDB into stable until
>> a new Debian release, at which point a new package version would be
>> considered for stable.
>>
>> The two project's models simply do not match up. Once I saw this, and
>> a few other things happened, I decided to pull out and am now of the
>> opinion that it is up to Apache CouchDB, Cloudant, and/or individual
>> community members to provide these packages.
>>
>> Luckily source installs are very simple on Debian and Ubuntu,
>> especially when compared to CentOS/RHEL.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> --
>> Sam Bisbee
>>
>> > On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Jens Rantil <jens.rantil@telavox.se>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I saw that you are the maintainer of the Debian CouchDB package.
>> >> Currently, the CouchDB package is lagging behind quite a lot (there is a
>> >> major leap in version number between stable (0.11) and testing
>> (1.1.1)). Is
>> >> there any way/possibility to create a backport package of CouchDB to
>> make a
>> >> modern version of the package available to unstable?
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Jens
>> >>
>>

Mime
View raw message