Pkg xen devel - Feb 2006 - More on our TODO lit

Hi!

We have a couple more things on our TODO list, it seems... (If we could use the
BTS tracking things would be better) (or we could use the issue tracker on
alioth, for now)


1. xen-utils:
	Right now domains get shut down on upgrade... This is ok in a 2.0 -> 3.0
	scenario, but it's not in a 3.0.1 -> 3.0.2, where we could avoid that,
	probably! Should we perhaps try to avoid that, hacking a bit on the
	maintainer scripts?

2. kernel-patch-xen:
	Steve says the policy is not to distribute it unless it applies to the
	debian kernel... Shall we withdraw it? We can still have the diff
	perhaps published on alioth (as there it's more official than in some
	website of ours) and document this in README, for people who prefer to
	roll their own kernel! What to you think? In that case we can leave the
	patch in the repo, and just move it out of the debian/ directory...

3. -unstable:
	Steve says it's useless to distribute both unstable and 3.0, Bastian and
	Jeremy would like to... For me, no problem at all, but we'll have to
	sort this out!

4. glibc:
	Contacting the glibc team is still on our TODO list, and can be done
	after the release!

5. kernel:
	Sorting things out with Bastian and the kernel team still pending...

6. wnpp:
	Should we file an ITA there, now or in one day or two, as consensus on
	debian-devel seems we should adopt the package, but there are still a
	couple of things that we might want to wait for before uploading!

7. readme, etc:
	The other couple of small things I pointed out in some mail replying to
	-changes...

Guido

On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 08:58:07AM +0100, Guido Trotter
wrote:
> 1. xen-utils:
> 	Right now domains get shut down on upgrade... This is ok in a 2.0 ->
3.0
> 	scenario, but it's not in a 3.0.1 -> 3.0.2, where we could avoid
that,
> 	probably! Should we perhaps try to avoid that, hacking a bit on the
> 	maintainer scripts?
Using debconf probably, some package like openvpn (the first I can
remember) ask about being restarted during upgraded, or not.
 
> 2. kernel-patch-xen:
> 	Steve says the policy is not to distribute it unless it applies to the
> 	debian kernel... Shall we withdraw it? We can still have the diff
> 	perhaps published on alioth (as there it's more official than in some
> 	website of ours) and document this in README, for people who prefer to
> 	roll their own kernel! What to you think? In that case we can leave the
> 	patch in the repo, and just move it out of the debian/ directory...
Steve's right, unfortunately... So what's better for our users?
> 3. -unstable:
> 	Steve says it's useless to distribute both unstable and 3.0, Bastian
and
> 	Jeremy would like to... For me, no problem at all, but we'll have to
> 	sort this out!
I don't really care. What I know is that I'm going to use a stable
version for production systems :-)
> 4. glibc:
> 	Contacting the glibc team is still on our TODO list, and can be done
> 	after the release!
*ack*
> 5. kernel:
> 	Sorting things out with Bastian and the kernel team still pending...
Yes, but other people from the kernel team seems reasonable.
If they could care of dom0/domU kernel, it will be great.
> 6. wnpp:
> 	Should we file an ITA there, now or in one day or two, as consensus on
> 	debian-devel seems we should adopt the package, but there are still a
> 	couple of things that we might want to wait for before uploading!
I don't think we should open an ITA since there is no O no bug report.
That's a take over, I don't think there is a clear procedure. ;)

-- 
Julien Danjou
.''`.  Debian Developer
: :' : http://julien.danjou.info
`. `'  http://people.debian.org/~acid
  `-   9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974  C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url :
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-xen-devel/attachments/20060225/f3dbad81/attachment.pgp