On 2013-04-20 04:37, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I came across this on Planet Debian
http://rb.doesntexist.org/blog//posts/lack_of_cooperation_from_ubuntu/
I'm guessing that Ubuntu may not have pushed the changes to sid
because
of the freeze, that may well be the answer to Rogério's questions.
Those changes are extremely recent. For instance, MongoDB 2.2 was only
uploaded to Ubuntu on March 21. The ARM changes are also just from this
recent raring cycle which only began in October.
MongoDB is getting a lot of attention because it is at the core of
Juju. Normally this much delta would be avoided, but some new features
from 2.2 are needed and ARM is an important platform for Ubuntu server.
Typically Ubuntu takes a pattern of re-converging with Debian as much
as possible early in each 6 month cycle. So I would expect that we will
get quite a few patches pushed toward Debian unstable right about the
time wheezy releases.
Nonetheless, with derivatives and Debian itself having different
release
cycles, and wearing my upstream developer hat, I can't help wondering:
how can upstreams ensure that the freshest versions of their package
propagate to the derivatives without duplicating effort?
These patches, by and large should not require duplication. If you
look, some of the arm support patches happened in Fedora, not Ubuntu.
Now, I think I might scold my colleagues in Ubuntu for not annotating
their patches with bug reports so we can make sure they get forwarded to
upstream and closed. But as long as these issues are being forwarded
upstream, they should not be "duplicated" at all.
For example, to respect the Debian release process, I've avoided
uploading the latest versions of my packages to sid, so it appears
that
newer versions of those packages missed the boat when Ubuntu started
their freeze. This means that both Debian and Ubuntu will release
with
versions of the packages that are old and don't have the latest bug
fixes and/or any manual effort to work around that takes away time
that
could be spent on more bug fixes or features
Debian is focused on stable releases. There's nothing "wrong" with this
model, but it does mean you don't get the latest upstreams without
diverging. IMO this is why upstream packaging should be embraced and
enhanced rather than focusing on dpkg.
I once worked on the 'pkgme' project for Ubuntu and there have been
others, but never followed through. The idea was just to build debian
source packages from upstream sources. Upstreams should be able to
release a package which serves their needs, and Debian should be able to
consume these almost directly. Where Debian's efforts should be focused
is on things like license verification and helping bug reports and fixes
get to upstream.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/da27206329b6ad09d56602e8d78b4...@secure.spamaps.org
