Maintaining the LTS version of fwts

[Colin Ian King]

On 27/07/12 10:14, Keng-Yu Lin wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Colin Ian King
> <colin.king at canonical.com> wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I've seen a couple of false positives on some tests that certification are
>> generating on the dmi_decode tests and I was wondering if either we do
>> another fwts release for Precise with just these fixes, or we upload the
>> latest stable fwts to Precise so that the LTS gets all the new code -
>> especially the ACPI 5.0 goodness that is landing.
>>
>> Any comments on this idea?
>>
>> Colin
>>
>
> I am rather happy to upload the whole to Precise rather than picking
> up a few patches.
> Normally I would agree that to picking up the necessary patches for
> SRU makes more sens, but for the very LTS of Precise, it may not be
> so.
> Thinking of the 12.04.1 and 12.04.2, I definitely think that we should
> upload the new fwts for them (I think that this is another thing we
> should discuss, perhaps now is a good time).
>
> With that in my mind, maintaining a separate version for Precise now
> and have it only live before 12.04.1 or 12.04.2 seems a waste of human
> power to me.
>
> Though yes, reading the SRU policy, uploading the whole new version
> may not really comply, yet fwts is a leaf pacakge without others
> depending on it and fwts package is actually very isolated from
> others. I think we can try to convince the SRU team, though I am not
> really sure if it will get permitted. :-)
>
Well, going on the fact that we do test fwts quite a bit perhaps we 
could push it through as a SRU but the policy is quite strict:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates

Keng-Yu, can you check to see if we can push our latest changes into 
Precise?   ..I suspect we may just have to fall back on individual bug 
fix patches to meet the SRU conditions, in which case patches should be 
prefixed with:

[SRU][PRECISE]

..just like the kernel team mailing list.

Colin

> -kengyu
>