On Wed, Jan 24 2024 at 15:50:21 +0100, Christian Ehrhardt
<christian.ehrha...@canonical.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 7:45 AM Christopher James Halse Rogers
<r...@ubuntu.com> wrote:
Hello! Sorry for the delayed response.
On Mon, Jan 8 2024 at 12:23:56 +0100, Christian Ehrhardt
<christian.ehrha...@canonical.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> after formerly (pre 2018) people often reporting issues of not
having
> an LTS that could work fully well with the latest VMware we have,
now
> for more than five years, done regular backports of open-vm-tools.
> But a recent misunderstanding between Steve and myself has
identified
> that we missed to put this down clearly enough as a properly
approved
> "special case".
>
> To be fair - In the past, AFAIK, we have not always done/needed
such
> exceptions for things that go to SRU under "other safe cases" [1],
> but this case is not so much "safe" as more "a usually accepted
kind
> of risk for platform enablement". And since it caused
> misunderstanding let us document this now, to avoid the same
> misunderstanding to happen again in the future.
>
> Hence I've created [2] as a wiki page documenting this case.
> I would now ask the SRU team for a review, discussion and
hopefully
> eventually sign-off to acknowledge this case and add its link to
the
> known special cases [3].
This broadly looks sensible, and open-vm-tools is a reasonable
(virtual)-HWE case.
Thanks,
today I wondered about missing an answer, only to get help finding [1]
and in turn finding this in my spam folder.
So much for the reasons behind my extra week of delay to answer this.
I've taken the liberty of reorganising the wiki page to stick a
"Process" section up the top, and added some extra process verbiage.
Thanks, any order that works better for you works for me as well.
Please take a look and check that what I've moved around and added
still makes sense and captures what you need.
Yeah it is ok to focus on what matters and have most down there in
"Past context" as you put it.
There's an open question there, too - at what point after (or
before?)
a release do we first consider a backport of the open-vm-tools
package?
Yeah, I see you also added that as "Question" in the wiki.
Answering here and updating it there ...
In our experience we usually aimed for that to be 6 weeks (but often
ended up with a bit more until we found the time).
I think we can state 6 weeks in the exception, and if it takes more
time to get prepared there is no harm to it.
Was there anything else you needed to consider this approvable?
That was my only question. I approve this MRE, and will update the SRU
page accordingly.
--
Ubuntu-release mailing list
Ubuntu-release@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
