Bug#454498: 2.3.13 now available.
Centurion Computer Technology (2005) Ltd wrote: CCT Now for cyrus 2.3. CCT What's the status I've created a proposed 2.3.13 branch - see http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-cyrus-imapd-debian-devel/2009-February/002609.html and replies - and am trying to make time to clean/post/commit other patches currently in the Sirius repo, starting with the smallest, best-tested, and already-committed-upstream ones. CCT and what needs to be done. Testing. Feedback. More testing. A clean upgrade path from 2.2. Duncan -- Duncan Gibb - Technical Director Sirius Corporation plc - control through freedom http://www.siriusit.co.uk/ t: +44 870 608 0063 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#454498: 2.3.13 now available.
P.S.: I am happy running cyrus-imapd 2.2, so there is no strong push to invest time into packaging 2.3 before lenny is out (or arguing on this list whether somebody agree or disagree). But I am willing to support others work. Lenny is out! Yaay!!! Now for cyrus 2.3. What's the status and what needs to be done. -- Daniel Reurich Centurion Computer Technology (2005) Limited. Ph: 021 797 722 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#454498: 2.3.13 now available.
Wed, 2008-12-17 at 20:37 +0100, =?UTF-8?Q? Ond=C5=99ej_?= =?UTF-8?Q?Sur=C3=BD ?= wrote: What help would the Debian Cyrus Team most appreciate? I cannot speak for others, but I see no sense to package cyrus-imapd 2.3 right now, it will not get into next stable, so sensible approach is to wait for lenny to release and after that move cyrus-imapd-2.3 to unstable, prepare way how to upgrade from 2.2 to 2.3 and then remove 2.2 from unstable. I disagree. It should get into experimental ASAP and start getting some work done so that by the time lenny releases, we have it ready to move into unstable, and hopefully testing fairly quickly after that. We are talking about a relatively well tested and stable upstream source, so this should be able to move reasonably quickly in as a replacement for v2.2 Daniel. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#454498: 2.3.13 now available.
Centurion Computer Technology (2005) Ltd wrote: DG What help would the Debian Cyrus Team most appreciate? [I deliberately didn't copy my original message to the bug address, since it was a rather general discussion. But others have, so browsers of the bugs database may wish to read http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-cyrus-imapd-debian-devel/2008-December/002585.html for context.] OS I see no sense to package cyrus-imapd 2.3 right now, it will OS not get into next stable, so sensible approach is to wait for OS lenny to release and after that move cyrus-imapd-2.3 to OS unstable CCT I disagree. It should get into experimental ASAP and start CCT getting some work done so that by the time lenny releases, CCT we have it ready to move into unstable I think both points of view can be accommodated. We're already producing, and will continue to maintain, unofficial 2.3 packages for Etch and for Lenny, but it's unlikely we'll need binaries beyond amd64 and i386. Of course it's too late even to think about official Lenny, but maybe backports would carry 2.3 once it's in Sid... 2.3.8 is already in experimental, but incase's cyrus23 SVN branch hasn't been touched for a year. I'm guessing from the tiny volume of traffic on the coordination list, and the quietness of the SVN repo that the team don't have time to update to 2.3.13. We've already done that, and added a bunch of tweaks and new patches that suit _our_ needs. We'd love to see a 2.3 package set in official Debian that meets _everyone's_ needs. We're willing to contribute existing code, people's time, SVN servers, build hosts, etc, to help that happen. How can we best do this? Who else is doing the same things? CCT We are talking about a relatively well tested and stable CCT upstream source My personal perception is that the upstream developers are mostly dealing with large but fairly static installations (in universities), so while they do care deeply about scalability and do drive some new features, they don't hit as many corner cases or experience as much demand for cool new shiny stuff as we do deploying mainly in the SME and local government space. But that's just my excuse for all the patches we put in ;-) Stable in this context can mean slow-moving... Cheers Duncan -- Duncan Gibb, Technical Director Sirius Corporation plc - The Open Source Experts http://www.siriusit.co.uk/ Tel: +44 870 608 0063 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#454498: 2.3.13 now available.
Hi Duncan, 2.3.8 is already in experimental, but incase's cyrus23 SVN branch hasn't been touched for a year. I'm guessing from the tiny volume of traffic on the coordination list, and the quietness of the SVN repo that the team don't have time to update to 2.3.13. We've already done that, and added a bunch of tweaks and new patches that suit _our_ needs. We'd love to see a 2.3 package set in official Debian that meets _everyone's_ needs. We're willing to contribute existing code, people's time, SVN servers, build hosts, etc, to help that happen. How can we best do this? Who else is doing the same things? How about joining pkg-cyrus-imapd team on alioth? Speaking for myself I have very good experience with drawing new blood into packaging teams. We/I can always sponsor uploads prepared by somebody else. We are of course also interested in people who will look at old bugs and help them fix them, ie. not just put new shiny versions/features. And please bear in mind that we try to be pretty conservative, especially when it comes to bdb version. That also means that before 2.3 hits unstable there has to be a clean way how to upgrade from 2.2 (including all those nasty bdb databases, etc.). Ondrej. P.S.: I am happy running cyrus-imapd 2.2, so there is no strong push to invest time into packaging 2.3 before lenny is out (or arguing on this list whether somebody agree or disagree). But I am willing to support others work. -- Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org
Bug#454498: 2.3.13 now available.
What help would the Debian Cyrus Team most appreciate? I cannot speak for others, but I see no sense to package cyrus-imapd 2.3 right now, it will not get into next stable, so sensible approach is to wait for lenny to release and after that move cyrus-imapd-2.3 to unstable, prepare way how to upgrade from 2.2 to 2.3 and then remove 2.2 from unstable. Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org
Bug#454498: 2.3.13 now available.
Hi, I am keen to implement a server with the new replication features, so I'd like to help move this along. Thanks, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
