So I had a short conversation on #flatpak about this (unfortunately Alex is on holiday so can't provide any input at this current time).
<ahayzen> Hi, I know alex isn't around, but was wondering if anyone else would be able to answer this question. Are the odd series numbers truely development series and should distributions only be shipping even numbers in their stable releases? <ahayzen> Eg 0.11 vs 0.10. Should a stable distribution (eg Ubuntu 18.04, FF28, Debian Stable) use 0.10 rather than 0.11 ? <ahayzen> If this is the case, and if the distribution allows backports of future versions other than minor point releases, should it then jump to 0.12 after that to follow the "stable" series? (rather than going through 0.11 then 0.12) <TingPing> ahayzen, i *think* the even ones are considered LTS releases, not necessarily that the odd ones are unstable <ahayzen> The context here is that currently Ubuntu 18.04 has 0.11.X rather than 0.10.X https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/flatpak/+bug/1750382 <ahayzen> I'm considering helping out with maintaining/testing, and trying to find some clarification here <ahayzen> TingPing, so if the distro allows us to backport 0.12 later, there isn't any harm in shipping 0.11 ? <TingPing> no there should be no harm, just less backports to that release <ahayzen> As the main disadvantage i see of 0.11.X is that support is dropped earlier, so potentially fixes don't go back. Whereas 0.10 being an LTS release would have fixes for longer <TingPing> ahayzen, at the end of the day Alex really is the authority over it, i'm sure if LTS was stuck on 0.11 he'd try to keep it working <ahayzen> The way i see it is, if Ubuntu will allow us to upgrade from 0.11 -> 0.12 as a backport, then 0.11 is probably fine. But if they don't, then 0.10 maybe better to go with as Ubuntu 18.04 will be supported for 5 years <TingPing> the ideal case is indeed ubuntu keeping up <TingPing> ahayzen, considering flatpak hasn't even existed 5 years, i think it is unlikely 0.10 will be supported that long anyway <ahayzen> TingPing, right, feature freeze/debian import freeze is 1st March :') so before Alex comes back i think <ahayzen> right, i'm looking to try and see if flatpak can be allowed to have backports of future versions and then help with the necessary SRUs. <ahayzen> It probably won't be flatpak itself that'll be the problem, it would be if any of its depends needed a later version and then break other things <ahayzen> TingPing, thanks for the info, this helps clarify some things <TingPing> ahayzen, starting at 0.11 simplifies the fact that the document-portal was ripped out and moved to xdg-desktop-portal <ahayzen> right <ahayzen> and snappy now/will uses xdg-desktop-portal so guess that'll be kept up to date ;-) <TingPing> cool, so then the concern is just keeping ostree up to date <ahayzen> right, there aren't many reverse depends on it https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/DdYSZSvgPd/ <TingPing> keeping gnome-software up to date is also related, but as you say snap uses that too so <ahayzen> hmm OK, so now i'm leaning towards 0.11 <ahayzen> as that is already in the archive <ahayzen> and as you say, isn't unstable/development just not LTS <ahayzen> i just don't want it to get "stuck" on some unsupported version that doesn't get fixes :-) <TingPing> ahayzen, at worst it will be a great excuse for it to make it to SRU :P @Ken, Do you think we'd be able to SRU future flatpak versions (eg 0.12) into the bionic archive? With the relevant testing/SRU procedure. As if we can confirm this will be allowed, I think the choice becomes obvious to keep 0.11.X and then "upgrade" to 0.12.X as that is released etc. The problems with this will be the dependencies of flatpak, eg ostree, if those also need upgrading. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1750382 Title: please roll back to 0.10.x stable branch or confirm use of 0.11.x for bionic To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/flatpak/+bug/1750382/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
