Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
Quoting Jonas Smedegaard (2021-04-22 14:45:08) > Quoting Jonas Smedegaard (2019-12-08 14:09:10) > > Upstream releases are to be considered draft snapshots, > > and this package is therefore unsuitable for inclusion > > in long-term distributions like Debian stable. > > > > This bug should be bumped to release-critical state > > close to or after entering freeze - > > but not before so as to ease use for users tracking testing > > including derivatives based on Debian testing. > > As noted above, janus is unsuitable for long-term manitained stable > release, and should therefore be dropped from bullseye now it is > frozen. I have changed my mind: Makes sense for Debian to include Janus in its stable releases despite upstream lack of official support for that. Januss codebase is at least as stable if not more than a lot of other code that we ship with Debian stable, uncoordinated from upstream maintenance promises. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
Control: severity -1 serious Quoting Jonas Smedegaard (2019-12-08 14:09:10) > Upstream releases are to be considered draft snapshots, > and this package is therefore unsuitable for inclusion > in long-term distributions like Debian stable. > > This bug should be bumped to release-critical state > close to or after entering freeze - > but not before so as to ease use for users tracking testing > including derivatives based on Debian testing. As noted above, janus is unsuitable for long-term manitained stable release, and should therefore be dropped from bullseye now it is frozen. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
Quoting Salvatore Bonaccorso (2020-06-12 20:56:01) > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 08:53:35AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > Quoting Salvatore Bonaccorso (2020-06-11 22:54:43) > > > On Sun, Dec 08, 2019 at 02:09:10PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > > Upstream releases are to be considered draft snapshots, > > > > and this package is therefore unsuitable for inclusion > > > > in long-term distributions like Debian stable. > > > > > > > > This bug should be bumped to release-critical state > > > > close to or after entering freeze - > > > > but not before so as to ease use for users tracking testing > > > > including derivatives based on Debian testing. > > > > > > Reading the above, so janus should not have been in buster, right? > > > > While in good faith, I am not sure what you are implying with the > > above: In an ideal World (where crystal balls or time machines > > exist), yes. > > > > Both filing this bugreport and the upstream statement triggering it > > occured _after_ the release of Buster, indicating lack of knowledge > > on the matter at the time of release of Buster (or, in bad faith, > > that it was known but kept secret - sure you cannot mean that). > > Sorry I think there was a missunderstanding here, I by no means > implied bad faith or that at the time of the buster release it was > known. I probably wrote the above too short to make it clear. Let me > expand a bit. > > While I was filling bug for the new CVEs reported for janus I stumpled > over #946412 and that made me think to reply there and raise the > question on the removal of janus from buster. What I actually wanted > to ask with the above is "should janus be removed from buster as > ideally it would not have been released with it" but not implying the > situation was already clear at that time. > > Sorry if that all was not clear in my wording. > > Thanks for filling the removal, taken note of #962694. Thanks for clarifying. All makes sense. I realize that our conversation could've been even smoother if I had just _silently_ assumed good faith, instead of nitpicking. Sorry for that, I've learned from this. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
Hi On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:29:06AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Moritz Muehlenhoff (2020-06-12 10:20:31) > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 08:53:35AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > Quoting Salvatore Bonaccorso (2020-06-11 22:54:43) > > > > On Sun, Dec 08, 2019 at 02:09:10PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > > > Upstream releases are to be considered draft snapshots, > > > > > and this package is therefore unsuitable for inclusion > > > > > in long-term distributions like Debian stable. > > > > > > > > > > This bug should be bumped to release-critical state > > > > > close to or after entering freeze - > > > > > but not before so as to ease use for users tracking testing > > > > > including derivatives based on Debian testing. > > > > > > > > Reading the above, so janus should not have been in buster, right? > > > > > > While in good faith, I am not sure what you are implying with the > > > above: In an ideal World (where crystal balls or time machines > > > exist), yes. > > > > > > Both filing this bugreport and the upstream statement triggering it > > > occured _after_ the release of Buster, indicating lack of knowledge > > > on the matter at the time of release of Buster (or, in bad faith, > > > that it was known but kept secret - sure you cannot mean that). > > > > Don't read things into this which don't exist :-) > > > > The only question here was whether janus should continue to be in stable > > or not, noone is accusing you of anything. > > Thanks for confirmation :-) yes excacltly, that was my intention. Thanks Moritz for wording that in better way as I did. Regards, Salvatore
Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
Hi Jonas, On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 08:53:35AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Salvatore Bonaccorso (2020-06-11 22:54:43) > > On Sun, Dec 08, 2019 at 02:09:10PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > Upstream releases are to be considered draft snapshots, > > > and this package is therefore unsuitable for inclusion > > > in long-term distributions like Debian stable. > > > > > > This bug should be bumped to release-critical state > > > close to or after entering freeze - > > > but not before so as to ease use for users tracking testing > > > including derivatives based on Debian testing. > > > > Reading the above, so janus should not have been in buster, right? > > While in good faith, I am not sure what you are implying with the above: > In an ideal World (where crystal balls or time machines exist), yes. > > Both filing this bugreport and the upstream statement triggering it > occured _after_ the release of Buster, indicating lack of knowledge on > the matter at the time of release of Buster (or, in bad faith, that it > was known but kept secret - sure you cannot mean that). Sorry I think there was a missunderstanding here, I by no means implied bad faith or that at the time of the buster release it was known. I probably wrote the above too short to make it clear. Let me expand a bit. While I was filling bug for the new CVEs reported for janus I stumpled over #946412 and that made me think to reply there and raise the question on the removal of janus from buster. What I actually wanted to ask with the above is "should janus be removed from buster as ideally it would not have been released with it" but not implying the situation was already clear at that time. Sorry if that all was not clear in my wording. Thanks for filling the removal, taken note of #962694. Regards, Salvatore
Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
Quoting Moritz Muehlenhoff (2020-06-12 10:20:31) > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 08:53:35AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > Quoting Salvatore Bonaccorso (2020-06-11 22:54:43) > > > On Sun, Dec 08, 2019 at 02:09:10PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > > Upstream releases are to be considered draft snapshots, > > > > and this package is therefore unsuitable for inclusion > > > > in long-term distributions like Debian stable. > > > > > > > > This bug should be bumped to release-critical state > > > > close to or after entering freeze - > > > > but not before so as to ease use for users tracking testing > > > > including derivatives based on Debian testing. > > > > > > Reading the above, so janus should not have been in buster, right? > > > > While in good faith, I am not sure what you are implying with the > > above: In an ideal World (where crystal balls or time machines > > exist), yes. > > > > Both filing this bugreport and the upstream statement triggering it > > occured _after_ the release of Buster, indicating lack of knowledge > > on the matter at the time of release of Buster (or, in bad faith, > > that it was known but kept secret - sure you cannot mean that). > > Don't read things into this which don't exist :-) > > The only question here was whether janus should continue to be in stable > or not, noone is accusing you of anything. Thanks for confirmation :-) > > Sorry, I am not familiar with the procedures to do that, and > > appreciate your suggestion: Do I simply file a bugreport against > > ftp.debian.org as with removals from unstable/experimental, or which > > different runes should I throw? > > For this simply do "reportbug release.debian.org" and pick the "rm" > option. The removal (if agreeds by stable release managers), then > happens by the next point release. Yes, I figured that out (and tried communicate that shortly after I posted the above - sorry if that update didn't reach you), and should now have initiated the procedure with bug#962694. Thanks, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 08:53:35AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Salvatore Bonaccorso (2020-06-11 22:54:43) > > On Sun, Dec 08, 2019 at 02:09:10PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > Upstream releases are to be considered draft snapshots, > > > and this package is therefore unsuitable for inclusion > > > in long-term distributions like Debian stable. > > > > > > This bug should be bumped to release-critical state > > > close to or after entering freeze - > > > but not before so as to ease use for users tracking testing > > > including derivatives based on Debian testing. > > > > Reading the above, so janus should not have been in buster, right? > > While in good faith, I am not sure what you are implying with the above: > In an ideal World (where crystal balls or time machines exist), yes. > > Both filing this bugreport and the upstream statement triggering it > occured _after_ the release of Buster, indicating lack of knowledge on > the matter at the time of release of Buster (or, in bad faith, that it > was known but kept secret - sure you cannot mean that). Don't read things into this which don't exist :-) The only question here was whether janus should continue to be in stable or not, noone is accusing you of anything. > Sorry, I am not familiar with the procedures to do that, and appreciate > your suggestion: Do I simply file a bugreport against ftp.debian.org as > with removals from unstable/experimental, or which different runes > should I throw? For this simply do "reportbug release.debian.org" and pick the "rm" option. The removal (if agreeds by stable release managers), then happens by the next point release. Cheers, Moritz
Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
Quoting Jonas Smedegaard (2020-06-12 08:53:35) > Quoting Salvatore Bonaccorso (2020-06-11 22:54:43) > > As such it might be a good option to ask for removal of src:janus in > > buster. If you agree on that, can you fill a bug for the > > release-team/SRM to ask for removal of the package in the next buster > > point release? > > Yes, removal from Buster should be done. > > Sorry, I am not familiar with the procedures to do that, and appreciate > your suggestion: Do I simply file a bugreport against ftp.debian.org as > with removals from unstable/experimental, or which different runes > should I throw? Ah, ignore that last part, I found it now (silly me): reportbug release.debian.org - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
Quoting Salvatore Bonaccorso (2020-06-11 22:54:43) > On Sun, Dec 08, 2019 at 02:09:10PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > Upstream releases are to be considered draft snapshots, > > and this package is therefore unsuitable for inclusion > > in long-term distributions like Debian stable. > > > > This bug should be bumped to release-critical state > > close to or after entering freeze - > > but not before so as to ease use for users tracking testing > > including derivatives based on Debian testing. > > Reading the above, so janus should not have been in buster, right? While in good faith, I am not sure what you are implying with the above: In an ideal World (where crystal balls or time machines exist), yes. Both filing this bugreport and the upstream statement triggering it occured _after_ the release of Buster, indicating lack of knowledge on the matter at the time of release of Buster (or, in bad faith, that it was known but kept secret - sure you cannot mean that). > As such it might be a good option to ask for removal of src:janus in > buster. If you agree on that, can you fill a bug for the > release-team/SRM to ask for removal of the package in the next buster > point release? Yes, removal from Buster should be done. Sorry, I am not familiar with the procedures to do that, and appreciate your suggestion: Do I simply file a bugreport against ftp.debian.org as with removals from unstable/experimental, or which different runes should I throw? Kind regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
Hi Jonas, On Sun, Dec 08, 2019 at 02:09:10PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Package: janus-gateway > Version: 0 > Severity: important > Tags: upstream > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > Upstream releases are to be considered draft snapshots, > and this package is therefore unsuitable for inclusion > in long-term distributions like Debian stable. > > This bug should be bumped to release-critical state > close to or after entering freeze - > but not before so as to ease use for users tracking testing > including derivatives based on Debian testing. Reading the above, so janus should not have been in buster, right? As such it might be a good option to ask for removal of src:janus in buster. If you agree on that, can you fill a bug for the release-team/SRM to ask for removal of the package in the next buster point release? Regards, Salvatore
Bug#946412: janus-gateway: upstream does not support stable releases
Package: janus-gateway Version: 0 Severity: important Tags: upstream -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Upstream releases are to be considered draft snapshots, and this package is therefore unsuitable for inclusion in long-term distributions like Debian stable. This bug should be bumped to release-critical state close to or after entering freeze - but not before so as to ease use for users tracking testing including derivatives based on Debian testing. - Jonas -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEn+Ppw2aRpp/1PMaELHwxRsGgASEFAl3s9fMACgkQLHwxRsGg ASGvjA/8CRZ0Edug2xfXO0fdY84m9NazG24GXo5KtAsKefgUtKSJkBaIT0eyajDg fFpMNQ14F1oJIc7ngFtfUQ05R2xBN/+H8cnOq51zoh6WARdXYtM1UE8SojFYM95p ft9WcEmlcBX3K3tmHQT+aVjxvqRkyyaL22JPzQO/E+0xeQm+NU1w8zr4SX9dxPdl GDG9w/d1EhP9iEV/kZdcVVphiEt8KqUKdgLLA17/l53nXOXPIU2PXbL3PpLSj/PP TpfZdPr85Ry6PnS9n5CWx9TvbCG9LjptdfTnL/qVdY3QAMCgw+zLkL1zISkMOo4P BclXe4iPdthQC8wwE7OYNyCAVHOvbkQqSB6ybMK44uJe10IY2wzwt+nry/1dljhR hZYXRBmJT85UGL9/e+7EKh7J4vACRwtdOomD25iH8jXc9mg48buzlzSZojxypA14 LPjhiCB5UDdNSGFCS+Hq82UcB7CgJrsL0DNVLfJxs4RCklMmkos8OBQUwWYG3lcA yTUxEnJ48lpGJ4dxo9/pV520GWutHtYzsLXOr6zV2/9qNp+4OpAOAoPfXQeKsjY4 3oa0i+/ogKy9Kbzvi1Vw/kw2a+JRMyVbvGeN7pA86Or8tcG56qA+E5s8myoHHpNZ TQ2HbHvU8drVdvu+Et3kJhV1IJmw5VMSjYleJuGPACIp1HTDS88= =k5KT -END PGP SIGNATURE-
