[opensuse] nut package 17 months out of date?
Listmates, Anybody know why the nut package (network ups tools) is so far out of date? Version 2.4.1 has been out since February and all the 11.0 packages are still using 2.2.2 released in May 08? Anyone know if we still have a maintainer for the package? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Friday 09 October 2009 15:00:53 David C. Rankin wrote:
Listmates,
Anybody know why the nut package (network ups tools) is so far out of date? Version 2.4.1 has been out since February and all the 11.0 packages are still using 2.2.2 released in May 08? Anyone know if we still have a maintainer for the package?
Usually, new upstream versions are not considered for a product that has already been release. Instead, patches for specific bugs are selectively backported and an official update is issued. Have you checked for 2.4.x packages on the OBS? -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 15:16 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On Friday 09 October 2009 15:00:53 David C. Rankin wrote:
Listmates,
Anybody know why the nut package (network ups tools) is so far out of date? Version 2.4.1 has been out since February and all the 11.0 packages are still using 2.2.2 released in May 08? Anyone know if we still have a maintainer for the package?
Usually, new upstream versions are not considered for a product that has already been release. Instead, patches for specific bugs are selectively backported and an official update is issued.
Have you checked for 2.4.x packages on the OBS?
../repo/hardware/openSUSE_11.1/i586/nut-2.4.1-6.2.i586.rpm -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Friday 09 October 2009 03:21:32 pm Hans Witvliet wrote:
Have you checked for 2.4.x packages on the OBS?
../repo/hardware/openSUSE_11.1/i586/nut-2.4.1-6.2.i586.rpm
Not for 11.0 :-( I've built it from source with with the following: ./configure '--prefix=/usr' \ '--mandir=/usr/share/man' \ '--docdir=/usr/share/doc/packages/nut' \ '--datadir=/usr/share' \ '--sysconfdir=/etc/ups' \ '--localstatedir=/var' \ '--with-user=upsd' \ '--with-usb' \ '--with-hal' \ '--with-cgi' \ '--with-cgipath=/srv/www/cgi-bin/nut' \ '--with-htmlpath=/srv/www/htdocs/nut' I'll take a look at the 11.1 spec and see if I can hack it for 11.0. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 09/10/09 16:00, David C. Rankin wrote:
Listmates,
Anybody know why the nut package (network ups tools) is so far out of date? Version 2.4.1 has been out since February and all the 11.0 packages are still using 2.2.2 released in May 08?
Packages in released products are generally version frozen, there are a few exceptions though, this is not one of them. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Friday 09 October 2009 05:34:36 pm Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
On 09/10/09 16:00, David C. Rankin wrote:
Listmates,
Anybody know why the nut package (network ups tools) is so far out of date? Version 2.4.1 has been out since February and all the 11.0 packages are still using 2.2.2 released in May 08?
Packages in released products are generally version frozen, there are a few exceptions though, this is not one of them.
Ever thought about going to a rolling-release system with openSuSE? Just seem like so much cleaner way to do a distro. Leave SLES and SLED as the Novell "release" model products, but take openSuSE to a rolling-release model. I look around at the huge amount of manpower Novell pours into each openSuSE release and the maintenance of each release until EOL and the packages for all releases are out of date practically as each release happens. With a rolling-release, you eliminate maintaining 3 branches of everything, and as package updates are prepared and put out, then the entire openSuSE community can make use of it, not just some future release that won't be ready until some time in the future. 95% of the initial bugs that have been requiring Gigabyte updates to releases withing the first 30 days are completely eliminated. Never again do you have to worry about preparing 4000 packages for a single point in time release, updates to the whole distro occur 1 or a few at a time. When there are package groups that are dependent upon one another when upgraded -- that's what factory is for. A package group may live in factory for 3-4 weeks as the technical hurdles are worked out and then when ready, the group just rolls out as an update to the distro. I have closely compared the two models over the past 8 months and I think it is something that openSuSE should seriously consider. The cost savings alone would probably triple the net revenue Novell realizes off openSuSE virtually overnight. And the biggest benefit is that openSuSE can become a current distro with far less overhead instead of the current massive undertaking to maintain out of date packages. Honestly, I cannot see a downside to it from either Novell's or the user's standpoint. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday, 2009-10-10 at 23:48 -0500, David C. Rankin wrote:
Ever thought about going to a rolling-release system with openSuSE? Just seem like so much cleaner way to do a distro. Leave SLES and SLED as the Novell "release" model products, but take openSuSE to a rolling-release model.
I don't think so. It is more unstable. I have "problems" with 11.0 that are solved in 11.1, and new problems in 11.1 that were not in 11.0. With a rolling scheme I would have no way of installing a version that worked in each situation. There could be snapshots, but no way to patch them, because there would be no patches, just update everything to the newest version. No, I prefer the current state. If asked, I prefer longer maintenance periods than the current 18 month period. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkrRugkACgkQtTMYHG2NR9WlgACdFgL8GsFgpM7lDA2FFT2JK8Tx NuoAn21o6VMj6/WEb3L2/nU7d1EPsmSy =7UmG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 12:57 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Saturday, 2009-10-10 at 23:48 -0500, David C. Rankin wrote:
Ever thought about going to a rolling-release system with openSuSE? Just seem like so much cleaner way to do a distro. Leave SLES and SLED as the Novell "release" model products, but take openSuSE to a rolling-release model.
I don't think so. It is more unstable.
I have "problems" with 11.0 that are solved in 11.1, and new problems in 11.1 that were not in 11.0. With a rolling scheme I would have no way of installing a version that worked in each situation. There could be snapshots, but no way to patch them, because there would be no patches, just update everything to the newest version.
No, I prefer the current state. If asked, I prefer longer maintenance periods than the current 18 month period.
You mean something like giving the XX.3 release Long Term Support? Sounds nice, though a previous request for LTS has been declined some time ago... (probably too much work involved for the official staff) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Hans Witvliet wrote:
You mean something like giving the XX.3 release Long Term Support? Sounds nice, though a previous request for LTS has been declined some time ago... (probably too much work involved for the official staff)
Boyd Gerber proposed something along those lines a short while ago, it is still being discussed: http://lists.zenez.com/mailman/listinfo/opensle /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (15.4°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday, 2009-10-11 at 14:11 +0200, Hans Witvliet wrote:
On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 12:57 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
No, I prefer the current state. If asked, I prefer longer maintenance periods than the current 18 month period.
You mean something like giving the XX.3 release Long Term Support? Sounds nice, though a previous request for LTS has been declined some time ago... (probably too much work involved for the official staff)
That would be even nicer (and there is an initiative to get it done outside of Novell). For me, a two year period, like we had till now, would be enough. With an 18 month period it is impossible to plan the update for a fixed period of the year (say, the vacation period). It makes things difficult. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkrR3IUACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XxEgCeKxWatE1DdU6TYEDuypIMNvHb sRYAn3CFYE/nLWPU1zuAzduWlLUgyFzq =4dWC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 15:24 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Sunday, 2009-10-11 at 14:11 +0200, Hans Witvliet wrote:
On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 12:57 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
No, I prefer the current state. If asked, I prefer longer maintenance periods than the current 18 month period.
You mean something like giving the XX.3 release Long Term Support? Sounds nice, though a previous request for LTS has been declined some time ago... (probably too much work involved for the official staff)
That would be even nicer (and there is an initiative to get it done outside of Novell). For me, a two year period, like we had till now, would be enough. With an 18 month period it is impossible to plan the update for a fixed period of the year (say, the vacation period). It makes things difficult.
Outside Novell? You realize the enormity of such a job? perhaps they can make some "vintage" branges on the OBS and put there the entire 7.3, 8.3, 9.3 (and soon 10.3) trees in. But how many people would be able/willing to maintain all of those packages? Can't imagine that Novell is willing to spent any (human)resourses on it. So it would be a 100% community support thing. May be for some individual packages, but _ALL_ ??? Mission Impossible. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday, 2009-10-11 at 15:54 +0200, Hans Witvliet wrote:
On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 15:24 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
You mean something like giving the XX.3 release Long Term Support? Sounds nice, though a previous request for LTS has been declined some time ago... (probably too much work involved for the official staff)
That would be even nicer (and there is an initiative to get it done outside of Novell). For me, a two year period, like we had till now, would be enough. With an 18 month period it is impossible to plan the update for a fixed period of the year (say, the vacation period). It makes things difficult.
Outside Novell? You realize the enormity of such a job? perhaps they can make some "vintage" branges on the OBS and put there the entire 7.3, 8.3, 9.3 (and soon 10.3) trees in.
But how many people would be able/willing to maintain all of those packages? Can't imagine that Novell is willing to spent any (human)resourses on it. So it would be a 100% community support thing. May be for some individual packages, but _ALL_ ??? Mission Impossible.
I realize the complexity, but nevertheless, it is in fact being planned. Search the archive of the project list for subjects like "openSLES", "Long Term Support", "openSUSE LTS/openSLES initiative", "openSLE-openSUSE_LTS-wiki", "Creating a group of conserned Users and Novell partners/longer life time for openSUSE..."... Yes, there are talks and plans. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkrSZXAACgkQtTMYHG2NR9UUYQCeMfJwptg9JhI5jwuAYCqB0XBx ppgAn3k2JjMaEBxf8hWZbrQ6EVJoW68j =jC5B -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday, 2009-10-09 at 15:00 -0500, David C. Rankin wrote:
Anybody know why the nut package (network ups tools) is so far out of date? Version 2.4.1 has been out since February and all the 11.0 packages are still using 2.2.2 released in May 08? Anyone know if we still have a maintainer for the package?
That is correct and as it should be. Packages for any released distro are (almost) never updated. Factory does have nut-2.4.1-1.4 - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkrQT2UACgkQtTMYHG2NR9VtCgCfWo40Harg2T1ZzIk84dSTNH7r y5UAn1ePPPudbObNsDDJWbAxc/32Hj84 =YuuI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
participants (6)
-
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. -
Carlos E. R. -
Cristian Rodríguez -
David C. Rankin -
Hans Witvliet -
Per Jessen