Ticket #757 (closed defect: fixed)
Stop building for Jaunty
| Reported by: | jdreed | Owned by: | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | high | Milestone: | Natty Alpha |
| Component: | -- | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | Fixed in version: | ||
| Upstream bug: |
Description (last modified by geofft) (diff)
Change History
comment:3 Changed 14 years ago by geofft
- Description modified (diff)
I'm unsure I agree. The cost of building is small, in the absence of things that don't work on Jaunty (which I haven't heard of), and last I checked there are plenty of machines which still run Jaunty including athena.dialup. I'd like these machines to get security or printing fixes without us having to manually build for them. If we do now have few enough machines counterlogging as Jaunty, then I don't mind, but if it's build time we care about, why not parallelize builds the way we do when building all packages for a release?
comment:4 Changed 14 years ago by amb
[I'm attempting to represent the discussion at the release-team meeting on this.]
The number of machines running Jaunty has been going down sharply recently, so the case for keeping it is a lot less compelling. We've agreed to reexamine the issue around the beginning of February with the expectation of stopping Jaunty builds at that time.
comment:5 Changed 14 years ago by jdreed
- Priority changed from blocker to high
- Milestone changed from IAP 2011 to Natty Alpha
Camilla is going to manually run the machine count on or around the 15th of the month. We dropped from 117 machines in December to 113 in January, so "yay".
However, in an effort to stop making things up as we go along, I've come up with a draft policy. Feedback would be appreciated (we will discuss this at release-team too): http://debathena.mit.edu/trac/wiki/ReleaseSupport
Pulled in r24921. It won't be effective until someone updates the scripts checkout in the debathena locker; I'll call that "proposed" for now.