[Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian [signed]

Fri Feb 24 19:52:00 UTC 2006

    Upon looking at the ftp-master link you included. It appears Bastian
went with the process of further polluting the archive with additional
packages by naming his package xen-3.0 rather than simply replacing
Adam's 'xen' package like we have done. So for all intents and purposes
we could prolly still proceed and leave it up to a DD discussion which
to remove from the archive. I do think our packaging is superior as we
are working from the latest repository rather than a static tarball so
we would get fixes included quicker.

    You may have noticed my email went out to Bastian, the -kernel list
and ours. Hopefully it will generate some discussion and slow this issue
down a bit so it can be resolved logically not irrationally.

    Regards,
    Jeremy

Guido Trotter wrote:

>On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 10:00:18AM -0800, Jeremy T. Bouse [c] wrote:
>
>Hi,
>
>  
>
>>    What can I say gang, but "WOW!"... Just made it into work and seems
>>the list had a wild fire while I was commuting. It seems to me Bastian
>>had his own plans that he didn't make known and is apparently the only
>>one on the kernel team, that I've seen, wanting to completely manage
>>Xen. I can see his point about using -unstable rather than -testing and
>>it would seem that what we have in place could easily be transitioned to
>>work with it instead. Do we want to tag what we have now that works with
>>-testing and get any changes made to support -unstable done before we
>>release any packaging?
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Yeah, a lot of things can happen while commuting! ;) Anyway the I agree we can
>go on and support both unstable and testing... Just not only unstable: there are
>people who want to run xen in production, and thus would preffer not to have the
>bleeding edge! ;)
>
>My opinion is: let' fix the xenstore.so thing, tag and upload. Then we can
>manage two trees, one for unstable and one for stable! Unless the whole kernel
>team says they want it! 
>
>Also Bastian uploaded his package to unstable (it's sitting in NEW):
>http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html and he did so *after* the discussion
>started, which is not very fair (it seems like saying: I don't want to dicuss or
>to reach consensus)... What do we want to do? We already have a greater version
>(because of the +hg) so we could just follow... ;)
>
>Anyway if we upload we want to do it with 3.0-testing before and with unstable
>only later!
>
>  
>
>>    Maybe try a lil harder to get Bastian to join our efforts and
>>support from the kernel team side as we do really need that support and
>>it seems foolish to me to split hairs over this. Xen is complex and
>>needs more than one person to support it properly IMHO. Without any
>>kernel team support we will have trouble getting pre-built base Xen
>>kernel images (dom0 or domU) into the archive.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>I hope so... As you can see I tried, but he doesn't seem to be listening...
>Either we give up and all join the kernel team (but I'd rather not, I don't have
>time to follow kernel development) or we go ahead and hope he gets convinced...
>
>  
>
>>    I'm going to draft an email and try to get Bastian to communicate
>>with me and see if I can't get him to see our point better. From the
>>others that had responded that are not on the xen team, it seems they
>>agree that it shouldn't mean disbanding this team and that the kernel
>>team doesn't have the desire to maintain xen as well. Any thoughts?
>>
>>    
>>
>
>It seems that for now people say so... Also we had warned Adam (and anyone, on
>the BTS, and also the XenSource wiki (I posted there yesterday)) before about
>our intents, while we couldn't know about the other effort till now...
>
>Guido
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Pkg-xen-devel mailing list
>Pkg-xen-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
>http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-xen-devel
>
>  
>

--
------------------------ [ SECURITY NOTICE ] ------------------------
To: pkg-xen-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org.
For your security, jbouse at debian.org
digitally signed this message on 24 February 2006 at 19:52:02 UTC.
Verify this digital signature at http://www.ciphire.com/verify.
------------------- [ CIPHIRE DIGITAL SIGNATURE ] -------------------
Q2lwaGlyZSBTaWcuAjhwa2cteGVuLWRldmVsQGxpc3RzLmFsaW90aC5kZWJpYW4ub3JnA
Gpib3VzZUBkZWJpYW4ub3JnAGVtYWlsIGJvZHkASQwAAHwAfAAAAAEAAADiY/9DSQwAAF
kDAAIAAgACACBbbe/kx8tpUyJhmgvpubSxgZmn0dxD/KgljpsTpsvZVQEAJLQlVT52rnd
nqox8AzyHB09mthbDWqsaMF1UXyCm8B5cNitAP2i+G2gznhRgkuxV/ZJmyw73sIqS29fR
Z4KvhtqTUHCGU2lnRW5k
--------------------- [ END DIGITAL SIGNATURE ] ---------------------