On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 09:01:44PM -0500, Bhaskar, K.S wrote: > >Is this a vote to keep three fis-gtm versions at the same time inside a > >Debian release? If I understood Luis correctly we are at first > >targeting at some educational VistA installation. From your explanation > >it seems to become clear that if you want to support a Clinic you > >somehow need a support company that might perfectly profit from our > >fis-gtm packages but the maintenance of all previous versions need to be > >put on their shoulders. We should not try to push the burden on the > >Debian release team / security team. That's simply not how Debian > >works. > > [KSB3] I don't think there will be an excessive burden on the Debian > release / security team. Let me propose that we see how it goes and > if it looks like it will be a burden, we'll think of a different > strategy.
Please trust my experience that it is not about what you think but what is accepted by the gatekeepers of debian (=ftpmaster): They will not accept your plan and will refuse multiple versions of the same software if the number goes (far) beyond the usual migration procedure. > >>Because bugs in GT.M are very infrequently encountered in > >>production, > >I'm sorry but as long as any software is not written by the magical good > >of infallibility it will have bugs. So we need to be prepared to fix it > >and we should try to keep the burden for people who need to do the > >actual work at a bearable amount. > > [KSB3] The upstream team will fix material bugs in a timely fashion. > Yes, GT.M has many bugs that the development team knows about, but > remember that GT.M has been in daily production use since 1986, and > available as free / open source software since 2001. But the track > record for the last ten or more years is that it is very rare for > users to encounter bugs in production environments. So again, let > me propose that we see how it goes in practice. I have no reason to doubt your statement but you forget that also non-upstream bugs might create some unexpected work. My suggestion is that we will go for the moment with fis-gtm 6.0 and 6.1. If it really turns out that the 6.0 packages remain as static as you are predicting I do not see any problem from users perspective to fetch the packages from http://snapshot.debian.org/package/fis-gtm/6.0-003-2/ and they can pin their system via sources.list and apt preferences to this version which solves the user problem without creating any trouble on the Debian side. As I said: It is not me who is vetoing your plan - there are some people with a more general overview who need to accept it. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
