On Thu, 2019-03-14 at 15:10 -0500, Omar wrote:
On 3/14/19 1:52 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Quoting Jeremiah C. Foster (2019-03-14 18:57:44)
What do those folks on this mailing list think? Should we keep PureOS Green on Debian (Buster) Stable?
Above is strongly tied the related question of what to do about cravings for exciting new $stuff as Buster (non-)evolves to become steadily more boring over its multi-year lifespan.
I might give you another perspective from an intermediate user. What some of you 'OS nerds' ;) consider boring, I'm guessing the majority of our customers see it as a very functional, cool as-is tool to get things done. As long as privacy and security improvements don't get stagnant... And any customer that may be as advanced as you guys, will know the ways to make it un-boring :)
+1
I think the majority of our enterprise user base will feel the exact same way.
Do we...
a) Tell users to wait for it to become boring enough?
Yes.
b) Maintain a local fork as .deb in PureOS for each wish? c) Maintain a local flatpak for each wish?
flatpak is going to be installed on the system so those who want cutting edge can turn to that.
d) Tell users to include .deb/flatpack maintained elsewhere?
With a) I say yes let's do it. But I expect others in the company to not really want that option for several years, not even for enterprise users.
What evidence supports this? I've generally received positive feedback when talking about stability with the move to Debian Stable from other parts of PureOS. I have received some anecdotal evidence along the lines you've stated, that 5 years is too long, but two years may be reasonable. H
What about providing a dist-upgrade to Bullseye when it is stable?
Testing that is simple: Imagine PureOS being Stretch until 6 months from now (i.e. until Buster becomes boring _and_ we finish testing that it really truly is boring also with our adaptations).
With b) I say no: We lack manpower, procedures, and infrastructure to handle that - including security tracking but also other things.
With c) I say that those responsible for flatpack maintenance need to evaluate when they are ready - including security tracking but also other things. Which implies that it is a no if PureOS team has that responsibility.
With d) I say no: It is irresponsible of us to point our users elsewhere.
I think your points here are all valid and ought to be kept in mind.
Regards,
jeremiah