Hello there, On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 08:44:26PM +0000, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> If the SRU team feels it's going well, I'm in favor. On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 07:57:29PM +0000, Kees Cook wrote: > Can someone from the SRU team vouch for this package? On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 00:07:52AM +0000, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > Is it worth considering a formal delegation of these requests / > decisions to SRU+Security teams, with TB as an escalation path? As a member of the SRU team, I can say that I am in favor of the nova package being granted an MRE based on the stated upstream update policy and the stated committment of the server team to do additional regression testing via deployment of the packages in -proposed. I don't say that I /vouch/ for this package however. This is comparatively new software that has never undergone a successful SRU for a new upstream point release, so we don't really have any practical experience that lets us judge the quality of the upstream regression testing. From reading the TB list archives of the past months, that seems to be one of the things that some members of the TB are requesting as a prerequisite for an MRE. That's not consistent with the documented policy on <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions> though, and I don't think that's the right way to structure our handling of MREs. The high demand for SRUs following the 12.04 LTS release has led to the SRU team members individually being pressured to accept SRUs that *don't* fit the stated policy of patches that are "as small and unintrusive as possible". If the SRU team is put in the position of having the authority of being able to sign off on these exceptions directly, I think an inevitable outcome is that the SRU team will cave to that pressure, and accept SRUs against their better judgement and without the level of scrutiny of the upstream regression testing that the MRE process calls for. I recognize that the TB doesn't have an infinite amount of time for processing MRE requests and so you might prefer to delegate this to the SRU team, but I don't think the SRU team is in a much better position there, in point of fact. We've been working this month to expand the SRU team to address a manpower gap; I think that having the SRU team approving exceptions would make that gap much worse and lead to poor decisions around SRU acceptance. OTOH, if the TB is going to rely on SRU team input before granting MREs, I think the exception requests are likely to stall precisely because the SRU team often doesn't have a basis for an informed opinion. So there's my two cents in advance of today's TB meeting, which has on the agenda to discuss the MRE process. :) In the meantime, on the basis of the timbre of this thread, I'm going to go ahead and accept the current nova SRU to precise-proposed to unblock folks for testing. I would appreciate it if some member of the TB would formally grant an MRE here (if that's the intent) and add it to the list on <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions>. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- technical-board mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
