[567] in athena10
Re: lynx library problem on Athena 10
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Cattey)
Thu Oct 9 17:30:22 2008
In-Reply-To: <200810092054.m99KssjE015623@central.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <DD27A4B3-A914-4A8D-BBE3-06ECA4DDF790@mit.edu>
Cc: Sam Hartman <hartmans@mit.edu>, tabbott@mit.edu, athena10@mit.edu
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: William Cattey <wdc@MIT.EDU>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 17:28:57 -0400
To: Alex T Prengel <alexp@mit.edu>
I'm starting to get confused by the assertions that LTS and Athena
lockers are being updated both more and less frequently than each
other. Let me see if I understand what is actually being said:
1. Some Athena locker software goes many years without any update
whatsoever. For example lynx in infoagents.
2. Actively maintained Athena lockers get updated with new
functionality every 6 to 12 months.
3. Actively maintained Athena lockers may receive bug fix updates
more frequently than every 6 months.
4. The LTS Ubuntu release gets constant bug fix updates, but may not
see new functionality until the next LTS release in 18 months.
The problem I believe Alex is trying to solve is:
Offer new functionality and the most up to date libraries for key
third party applications every 6 months.
I would propose the following next steps:
1. Put lynx and svn into the athena-cluster-software metapackage.
That seems like a no-brainer, because it looks like even on an 18
month worst case new-functionality cycle, Ubuntu is going to do as
well or better than we have in our locker software.
2. Continue discussing whether Athena 10 should be standardizing on
LTS or the every 6 month Ubuntu release cycle.
3. To pull in another thread, I would suggest we add a new
metapackage to Athena 10: debathena-cluster-thirdparty. This
metapackage would be maintained by Alex Prengel, and would contain
the list of all the software that Alex has heretofore maintained in
lockers that would be more efficiently supported by just installing
from standard Ubuntu repos.
The reason why I suggest making it a package separate from debathena-
cluster-software is that it gives Alex control over the list of
packages his customers get. Previously, Alex would get a request,
would two one of three things:
1. Build the software into a locker.
2. Request that Athena Release team put some new stuff in the Athena
release.
3. Reject the request (for a possible variety of reasons not germane
to this discussion.)
The Athena release team would put into debathena-cluster-software
those things that make sense from a systems perspective. Alex would
control the list of packages that make sense from a user perspective.
Yes, there is overlaps between the two perspectives.
I am interested in what people think about doing it this way.
-Bill
On Oct 9, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Alex T Prengel wrote:
>
>> In many cases I think LTS releases will provide more frequent updates
>> than we have typically done to locker software.
>
> OK- I see your point. Many of the lockers I maintain are updated at
> least annually and some about every 6 months; so for my purposes going
> only with LTS releases is likely to be problematic. I could keep
> maintaining those apps in lockers but that's not exactly a desirable
> solution if they're available as Ubuntu packages and I'd much prefer
> putting as much as possible in the release.
>
> A.
