Re: Supporting armel/armhf in wheezy-lts
On Monday, April 25, 2016 02:07:01 AM Luca Filipozzi wrote: > On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 09:55:10AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > Do you have some concrete suggestions? > > Decrease the separation by moving the funds management into Debian proper > (via a TO like SPI) and move to a bounty model for working on LTS. Make > sure we're transparent with our language regarding Debian being produced by > volunteers (eg: "The Debian Project consists of volunteers, and our > products are developed entirely by volunteers." on [1]) by commenting on > how bounties are available (or something). Consider making LTS management > a delegated team. > > OR > > Increase the separation by removing the fundraising statements / links from > the LTS pages previously mentioned, making Freexian just another > consultancy listed on the consultancy pages. > > None of this is meant to diminish or tarnish the very significant > contribution that you or Freexian are making, which are both extensive and > impressive. I'm seeking greater definition of the role and the language > used. > > [1]: https://www.debian.org/devel/join/ Any suggestions on how to get that done in the next two days before wheezy-lts starts? It might be a bit more practical to defer the idea of completely changing the LTS program to a moment when there's a bit more time (maybe Debconf). So far, I don't think anyone has specifically objected to the addition of armel/armhf. Scott K signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Supporting armel/armhf in wheezy-lts
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 09:55:10AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Do you have some concrete suggestions? Decrease the separation by moving the funds management into Debian proper (via a TO like SPI) and move to a bounty model for working on LTS. Make sure we're transparent with our language regarding Debian being produced by volunteers (eg: "The Debian Project consists of volunteers, and our products are developed entirely by volunteers." on [1]) by commenting on how bounties are available (or something). Consider making LTS management a delegated team. OR Increase the separation by removing the fundraising statements / links from the LTS pages previously mentioned, making Freexian just another consultancy listed on the consultancy pages. None of this is meant to diminish or tarnish the very significant contribution that you or Freexian are making, which are both extensive and impressive. I'm seeking greater definition of the role and the language used. [1]: https://www.debian.org/devel/join/ -- Luca Filipozzi http://www.crowdrise.com/SupportDebian
Re: Supporting armel/armhf in wheezy-lts
On Sun, 2016-04-24 at 22:24 +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 09:45 +0200, Markus Koschany wrote: > > > > Am 18.04.2016 um 08:45 schrieb Guido Günther: > > [...] > > > > > > > > > I'm all for it (although it's easy to say for me since the most burden > > > will probably be on the kernel team) and having it as experimental with > > > a single sponsor seems sensible. > > +1 from my side too. I guess I'm one of those armel hobbyists and I > > could test the software even on real hardware. > > > > > > > > > > > I assume the level of sponsorship offered is reasonable to support an > > > arm port? I still wonder how we could would make it simpler to have this > > > support end up at the right places (i.e. LTS gets the sponsorship while > > > other teams like release team, security team also have additional work)? > > I also think that the opinions of the kernel team / Ben are crucial if > > we want to support ARM in the future. Otherwise I would expect that > > supporting ARM scales pretty well and that it mainly requires more time > > for testing the software. > [...] > > Openblocks ships its own kernel packages for wheezy, so they won't even I meant the company, Plat'Home. Ben. > care about the linux package. I also don't remember spending much time > on architecture-specific issues in stable updates (other than x86). > > Ben. > -- Ben Hutchings Larkinson's Law: All laws are basically false. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Supporting armel/armhf in wheezy-lts
On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 09:45 +0200, Markus Koschany wrote: > Am 18.04.2016 um 08:45 schrieb Guido Günther: > [...] > > > > I'm all for it (although it's easy to say for me since the most burden > > will probably be on the kernel team) and having it as experimental with > > a single sponsor seems sensible. > +1 from my side too. I guess I'm one of those armel hobbyists and I > could test the software even on real hardware. > > > > > I assume the level of sponsorship offered is reasonable to support an > > arm port? I still wonder how we could would make it simpler to have this > > support end up at the right places (i.e. LTS gets the sponsorship while > > other teams like release team, security team also have additional work)? > I also think that the opinions of the kernel team / Ben are crucial if > we want to support ARM in the future. Otherwise I would expect that > supporting ARM scales pretty well and that it mainly requires more time > for testing the software. [...] Openblocks ships its own kernel packages for wheezy, so they won't even care about the linux package. I also don't remember spending much time on architecture-specific issues in stable updates (other than x86). Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Larkinson's Law: All laws are basically false. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
testing asterisk for Wheezy LTS
Hi everybody, I uploaded version 1.8.13.1~dfsg1-3+deb7u4 of asterisk to: https://people.debian.org/~alteholz/packages/wheezy-lts/asterisk/amd64/ https://people.debian.org/~alteholz/packages/wheezy-lts/asterisk/i386/ Please give it a try and tell me about any problems you met. Thanks! Thorsten
Re: working for wheezy-security until wheezy-lts starts
On Wed, 2016-04-13 at 21:51 +1000, Brian May wrote: [...] > (dvswitch) [...] This is known to be broken with newer libav and has not been fixed upstream. (I think I was able to make it build, but it then crashed at run-time.) Definitely a candidate for removal. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Larkinson's Law: All laws are basically false. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Supporting armel/armhf in wheezy-lts
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 09:55:10AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/ makes it appear that LTS is an official Debian > > effort. > > And it is. There are multiple Debian developers who have initiated this > project, have been organizing it on debian-lts@lists.debian.org (and not > all of them have been paid by Freexian, including many members of the > security team). Indeed. In addition there's also quite a few DDs who have worked on LTS updates who are not payed through the funds collected by Freexian (usually for packages maintained by them). Cheers, Moritz
Re: Supporting armel/armhf in wheezy-lts
On 04/24/2016 09:55 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote: As a Debian developer (and not only as a freelancer/company owner) I do care about Debian LTS because it is important for Debian's long term relevance (at least according to me). An off-topic: As a Debian user (not a developer/programmer, at least not yet) I strongly support Debian LTS project. Occasionally I do some voluntary job by promoting Debian (and Linux in general) in various technical conferences and academic visits. Having said that, I wonder if there are some resources for promoters of that kind that you could recommend? For example, I am particularly interested in non-expensive publishing houses that are willingly to publish books in lesser-used disciplines, such as using Linux as a component of amateur radio networks in various educational environments, ... Best regards, Miroslav Skoric -- tutorial instructor: http://www.comcas.org/ http://sdiwc.net/conferences/icctim2015/ http://wocn2014.org/wtutorials.html http://sdiwc.net/conferences/2014/iceee2014/tutorial/ http://www.juit.ac.in/ISPCC_2013/ http://www.buruniv.ac.in/ICCS-2013/index.html http://www.sdiwc.net/thi/ http://www.sdiwc.net/kl/ http://www.iaeng.org/IMECS2011 http://www.dirf.org/ndt2010 http://www.icact.org/ http://www.iaeng.org/IMECS2009 http://www.iaria.org/conferences2008/ICWMC08.html http://www.wseas.org/conferences/2008/greece/education/ http://www.wseas.us/conferences/2009/rodos/education http://eurocon2007.isep.pw.edu.pl/index.php?id=tutorials.php http://tldp.org/HOWTO/FBB.html workshop / visiting lecturer: IIITM Gwalior, India SRM University, Chennai, India Vardhaman College of Engineering, Hyderabad, India GRIET, Hyderabad, India NIT Surat, India IIT, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India Techno India NJR Institute of Technology, Udaipur, India BMS College of Engineering, Bangalore, India IIITM-K, Technopark, Trivandrum, India BU, Bangkok, Thailand IIUM, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia book chapter author: Handbook of Research on Human Performance and Instructional Technology ISBN: 978-1-60566-782-9; 678 pp; October 2009 Published under Information Science Reference, an imprint of IGI Global http://www.igi-global.com/reference/details.asp?id=34814 Simulation in Computer Network Design and Modeling: Use and Analysis ISBN: 978-1-46660-191-8; 582 pages; February 2012 Published by IGI Global, USA http://www.igi-global.com/book/simulation-computer-network-design-modeling/58282 Wireless Networks and Security: Issues, Challenges and Research Trends ISBN: 978-3-642-36168-5; 510 pages; February 2013 Published by Springer, Germany http://www.springer.com/engineering/signals/book/978-3-642-36168-5 Handbook of Research on Progressive Trends in Wireless Communications and Networking ISBN: 9781466651708; 592 pages; February 2014 Published by IGI Global, USA http://www.igi-global.com/book/wireless-communications-networking/90600
Re: Supporting armel/armhf in wheezy-lts
Hi, thanks for the feedback. On Sat, 23 Apr 2016, Julien Cristau wrote: > I think one of the contentious points is how "Freexian raising funds to > work on Debian LTS" is already too close to calling itself "Debian LTS > fundraising", so I'm not sure bringing them closer would alleviate > anyone's concerns. On Sat, 23 Apr 2016, Luca Filipozzi wrote: > I'm interested in working on Debian Partners but not if it includes Debian LTS > fundraising as currently structured: either Debian LTS fundraising falls under > the same umbrella as other Debian fundraising (and subject to the same rules, > including that funds not be used for reimbursing effort, potentially) or it is > separate and branded as a Freexian service. Just to be clear, I don't mind if the money (and the corresponding work that I don't particularly enjoy) is handled by a trusted organization. But as long as we assume that Debian is not willing to "reimburse effort" as you put it, then it just does not make sense since it would mean that Debian LTS would not exist. The reason why I did it within Freexian is that it was just the simplest way to get it started and to prove that given some sane rules it's possible to not harm the Debian community. Now that it's proven, I believe we can and should discuss how to handle it at the Debian level directly. As a Debian developer (and not only as a freelancer/company owner) I do care about Debian LTS because it is important for Debian's long term relevance (at least according to me). > https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/ makes it appear that LTS is an official Debian > effort. And it is. There are multiple Debian developers who have initiated this project, have been organizing it on debian-lts@lists.debian.org (and not all of them have been paid by Freexian, including many members of the security team). > However, https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Funding directs those interested in > providing funding in support LTS to do so through Freexian rather than through > Software in the Public Interest. This page directs to Debian developers who are willing to do the work for money. Most of them preferred to join the initiative I started behind the Freexian umbrella... mainly because it makes sense to have a common offer, clear rules, etc. While you might find that the distinction is not important, I find it important. Since Freexian is external to Debian, there's no reason for it to have some exclusive relationship concerning Debian LTS. We could have other similar structures. I do make a distinction between the Debian LTS project and Freexian as an administrative facilitator. > Consequently, I find the use of Debian resources such as the advertising above > and/or the use of Debian machines as being problematic. It is really worse that indicating that some Debian services are handled by a given (commercial) CDN? > Make the distinction clearer, and the problem goes away. Do you have some concrete suggestions? Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Support Debian LTS: http://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html Learn to master Debian: http://debian-handbook.info/get/
