Merge lp:~techtonik/ubuntu-packaging-guide/backports into lp:ubuntu-packaging-guide

[anatoly techtonik]

I believe that this makes backports terminologey less confusing for new users.

[Dmitry Shachnev (mitya57)]

To be honest, I like the old language more. Also, most of the changes are minor and will only break translations.

That's IMHO, other maintainers may have different opinions.

[Daniel Holbach (dholbach)]

I agree with Dmitry.

Anatoly: can you try to describe which points exactly are confusing and what should be changed? Maybe we can clarify it together.

review: Needs Information

[anatoly techtonik (techtonik)]

"new functionality available" is too vague. For instance, you can get new functionality into your environment by downloading new rules for your rule engine. By backporting stuff, you make newer versions available, which may also strip "old functionality" - cgminer package is a good example.

So, it is better not to insert straw mans into people heads and keep it straight. Backport is a newer _version_ of package for older Ubuntu release. The word "port" is confusing, "backport" is also not-self descriptive, and highly abstract terms like "new functionality" don't make it any better.

I understand that more educated people tend to enjoy more specialized lexicon, but for people new to packaging simplicity matters. It makes the process less exclusive.

Other points:
 - "fairly comprehensive" - just water. If you're not English native, that will make you waste time on dictionary lookups.
 - "The Backports Project is a means to provide new features to users." - the reasons above. You just need new package version, it may happen that it only contains critical bug fixes that Ubuntu developers don't care about. You may also need a new version, not a bug fix patch in most cases.

So, to me the judgement why you need Backport is out of scope of the document. The fact is that backports allow you to have updated version of some package on your system.

[Dmitry Shachnev (mitya57)]

No, we backport only packages that contain new functionality. Not every "new version" can be backported.

If an update "only contains critical bug fixes", then it should go to -updates, no to -backports.

review: Needs Fixing

[Dmitry Shachnev (mitya57)]

Also, I don't understand what 'Ubuntu in a "critical bug fix only" mode' means. Also, please don't insert spaces before periods.

[anatoly techtonik (techtonik)]

Every stable Ubuntu release is in "critical bug fix only" mode. It
doesn't get any good updates, because people are afraid they will
break things. Good example was dead 'thg', which got broken after new
unstable fork and stood broken three months after release. Logically,
a new version is more welcome than outdated patch, but people followed
the procedure.

I do not insist. If you feel that my version is not readable. that's
ok. I just advise you to take some guys from the street to read that.
--
anatoly t.

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Dmitry Shachnev <email address hidden> wrote:
> Also, I don't understand what 'Ubuntu in a "critical bug fix only" mode' means. Also, please don't insert spaces before periods.
> --
> https://code.launchpad.net/~techtonik/ubuntu-packaging-guide/backports/+merge/200036
> You are the owner of lp:~techtonik/ubuntu-packaging-guide/backports.

[Dmitry Shachnev (mitya57)]

In stable releases we can fix any bugs if the fixes can't cause regressions.

For packages having a MRE (i.e. all GNOME, Firefox/Thunderbird), we even upload new upstream versions on a regular basis.

[anatoly techtonik (techtonik)]

MRE?

Firefox and GNOME are exclusive, but people need other things, like
Ansible and stuff. `thg` is TortoiseHg, and instead of providing new a
better version, people just applied revision that fixed the failed
executable.
--
anatoly t.

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Dmitry Shachnev <email address hidden> wrote:
> In stable releases we can fix any bugs if the fixes can't cause regressions.
>
> For packages having a MRE (i.e. all GNOME, Firefox/Thunderbird), we even upload new upstream versions on a regular basis.
> --
> https://code.launchpad.net/~techtonik/ubuntu-packaging-guide/backports/+merge/200036
> You are the owner of lp:~techtonik/ubuntu-packaging-guide/backports.

[Dmitry Shachnev (mitya57)]

See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions

[anatoly techtonik (techtonik)]

Do as you wish. Hopefully you've got the message. I am probably not going to submit anything again, because I am not an English writer and not interesting in contributing here anymore, which I think is good, because it will be saving you some time.

[Dmitry Shachnev (mitya57)]

Anatoly: We *do* welcome contributions. You just haven't got us convinced on this particular issue (at least Daniel and me, if Andrew does not share my opinion, he is free to merge it).

Unmerged revisions

486. By anatoly techtonik on 2013-12-25

Retarget backports instructions to be more friendly to new users

=== modified file 'ubuntu-packaging-guide/backports.rst'
--- ubuntu-packaging-guide/backports.rst	2012-06-26 16:02:09 +0000
+++ ubuntu-packaging-guide/backports.rst	2013-12-25 13:24:15 +0000
@@ -2,21 +2,19 @@
 Backporting software updates
 ============================
 
-Sometimes you might want to make new functionality available in a stable
-release which is not connected to a critical bug fix. For these scenarios
-you have two options: either you `upload to a PPA 
+When you want to see new version of a package in a stable release (Ubuntu in a
+"critical bug fix only" mode), there are only two options: `upload to a PPA 
 <https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA>`_ or prepare a backport.
 
 
 Personal Package Archive (PPA)
 ==============================
 
-Using a PPA has a number of benefits. It is fairly straight-forward, you
-don't need approval of anyone, but the downside of it is that your users will
-have to manually enable it. It is a non-standard software source.
+PPA is a place for your own packages, and it's the easiest way. You don't need
+approval of anyone, but your users need to manually enable downloads from it,
+because it is a non-standard software source, and not checked for security.
 
-The `PPA documentation on Launchpad`_ is fairly comprehensive and should get
-you up and running in no time.
+The `PPA documentation on Launchpad`_ should get you up and running in no time.
 
 .. _PPA documentation on Launchpad: https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA
 
@@ -24,21 +22,21 @@
 Official Ubuntu Backports
 =========================
 
-The Backports Project is a means to provide new features to users. Because of 
-the inherent stability risks in backporting packages, users do not get 
-backported packages without some explicit action on their part. This 
-generally makes backports an inappropriate avenue for fixing bugs. If a 
-package in an Ubuntu release has a bug, it should be fixed either through the 
-:doc:`Security Update or the Stable Release Update 
-process<./security-and-stable-release-updates>`, as appropriate.
-
-Once you determined you want a package to be backported to a stable release,
-you will need to test-build and test it on the given stable release. 
-``pbuilder-dist`` (in the ``ubuntu-dev-tools`` package) is a very handy tool 
-to do this easily.
-
-To report the backport request and get it processed by the Backporters team,
-you can use the ``requestbackport`` tool (also in the ``ubuntu-dev-tools``
+The Backports Project is a place to provide new major package versions to
+users of old/stable Ubuntu releases . Because of the inherent stability risks
+in backporting packages, installing backported package requires explicit
+action from users. This makes backports an inappropriate avenue for fixing
+bugs. If a package in an Ubuntu release has a bug, it should be fixed through
+the :doc:`Security Update or the Stable Release Update 
+process<./security-and-stable-release-updates>`.
+
+Once you determined a package you want to be backported to a stable release,
+you need to test-build and test it on this Ubuntu release. 
+``pbuilder-dist`` (in the ``ubuntu-dev-tools`` package) helps to do this
+easily.
+
+Then you need to send backport request and get it processed by the Backporters
+team. Use the ``requestbackport`` tool (also in the ``ubuntu-dev-tools``
 package). It will determine the intermediate releases that package needs to 
 be backported to, list all reverse-dependencies, and file the backporting 
 request.  Also will it include a testing checklist in the bug.