On Tue, 2019-07-30 at 19:52 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
Am Di., 30. Juli 2019 um 19:19 Uhr schrieb Jeremiah C. Foster jeremiah.foster@puri.sm:
[...]
It's not a good state to be in, I think everyone agrees. Let's try and have a bias towards action, largely because if we move forward with a given approach and it breaks, we can change it. Yes, that may be difficult and messy (maybe not) but it is likely better than leaving current green users without a best-effort approach to security by bringing in Buster updates.
So, I'll express my preference here: green remains stable, we create a new 'amber' rolling release.
The consequences are;
- We need to assign resources to update green with the security and
other updates from Debian. If you were to give me a login to Laniakea Matthias I can go about documenting the process with your help. I can be the resource for now and when there are other resources available, we can add them.
- We need to create the new amber release and document to our users
how they may upgrade to that in their sources list.
The more severe consequences of going with that (essentially option B from https://lists.puri.sm/pipermail/pureos-project/2019-July/000167.html ) is that we need to hack the user's sources.list somehow in order to support this scenario.
Can we not ask those who want a rolling release to edit /etc/apt/sources.list themselves? This is already explained in various places: https://tracker.pureos.net/w/pureos/software_center/software_sources/
Or go with option A which is inflexible and risky, by not having -updates/-security suites and uploading everything to an unfrozen green suite directly. If we indeed freeze green, those questions must be answered first and implemented, otherwise our users of green would *still* not receive any more updates.
Cheers, Matthias