Meta-package naming for Xenial LTS backports

[Brad Figg]

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 08:37:34AM -0700, Brad Figg wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 12:44:32PM -0700, Leann Ogasawara wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Leann Ogasawara <
> > leann.ogasawara at canonical.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Tim Gardner <tim.gardner at canonical.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 07/29/2016 10:37 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> > >> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 08:40:46AM -0700, Tim Gardner wrote:
> > >> >> On 07/27/2016 08:04 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> > >> >>> We have been discussing some naming for new meta-packages to allow for
> > >> >>> automatic rolling upgrades between Hardware Enablement (HWE) kernels
> > >> >>> within the LTS series.  This thread aims to firm those up.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Currently we have meta-packages of the following forms:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>     linux{,-image,-headers,-signed,-tools}-<flavour>[-<variant>]
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The flavour then represents the primary use case for the kernel (for
> > >> >>> example generic and lowlatency) and the optional variant currently is
> > >> >>> used to identify the HWE kernels (lts-<series>).  For example:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>     linux-image-generic-lts-xenial
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The desire is to offer a rolling HWE kernel, this means a kernel
> > >> variant
> > >> >>> which is updated automatically to the latest available HWE kernel
> > >> within
> > >> >>> the LTS.  We would expect that to update to the next HWE kernel at
> > >> each
> > >> >>> point release.  We wish to offer this in two forms, rolling until we
> > >> >>> reach the next LTS release and continuing to roll after an upgrade.
> > >> >>> Finally we wish to be able to offer early accesss to these updates as
> > >> >>> soon as they are available for testing purposes.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> We are proposing the following variants:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>     -hwe-16.04
> > >> >>>     -hwe-rolling
> > >> >>>     -hwe-16.04-early
> > >> >>>     -hwe-rolling-early
> 
> Personally, I don't like "early". I prefer "preview".

Maybe "edge" as that's used by snappy and juju stores. I also like
the sound of "rolling-edge".

> 
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> So for example:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>     linux-generic-hwe-16.04
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> /me puts up some substantial scaffolding round his bikeshed.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> -apw
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I think the first 2 are fine. What is your intended use for "-early" ?
> > >> >> I'm reluctant to endorse something like "-early" if it isn't a release
> > >> >> requirement. Otherwise it'll get forgotten and grow stale.
> > >> >
> > >> > The intent of -early is it updated on the same cadance as the main ones,
> > >> > but it switches from lts-Y to lts-Z on first availability rather than
> > >> > waiting for the point release.  So they are the same much of the time,
> > >> > then when a new lts-Z is available that one will switch to it, we
> > >> > stablise it, and then the non -early one moves over to join it.
> > >> >
> > >> > -apw
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> In the interest of bike shedding, perhaps "-dev" would be more
> > >> descriptive.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I like "-preview", anyone else want to pick a color?
> > >
> > 
> > Introducing some additional questions I've received from the MAAS team:
> > 
> > Q: With those kernel names I assume the Debian package names will be
> > linux-hwe-16.04 and linux-hwe-rolling, correct?
> > A: I think we would also encode the <flavor> in there, eg.
> > linux-hwe-16.04-generic or linux-hwe-rolling-lowlatency.
> > 
> > Tim, Andy, Brad, thoughts ^^?
> 
> I agree we need <flavour>. I think for the preview it would be:
>   linux-hwe-rolling-preview-<flavour>
> 
> We are previewing the next roll not the next flavour.
> 
> > 
> > Q: I was also wondering what the low latency kernels will be named and
> > whether they will have a rolling and early|dev|preview package as well?
> > A:  If we are providing lowlatency as an HWE kernel (which we are),
> > lowlatency should also be rolling and have a preview package as well.  As
> > for the specific naming, lets get consensus on the above.
> > 
> 
> Agree.
> 
> > Q: Right now we have packages in Xenial using the name
> > linux-image-lowlatency-lts-<release>, I'm guessing that will change to
> > something like linux-lowlatency-16.04.
> > A:  Actually, I assumed we would still deliver the
> > linux-image-<flavor>-lts-<release> as they are today.  The new rolling meta
> > packages would then resolve to these.
> > 
> > Tim, Andy, Brad, thoughts here too ^^?
> 
> That was my thinking as well.
> 
> > 
> > Q: Also do you have any idea of a time frame when the meta packages for all
> > of this will be released?
> > A: We've not selected a specific deadline to deliver these new meta
> > packages.  I'd estimate end of Sept at the latest.  Is there an earlier
> > date that you were hoping for?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Leann
> 
> > -- 
> > kernel-team mailing list
> > kernel-team at lists.ubuntu.com
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
> 
> 
> -- 
> Brad Figg brad.figg at canonical.com http://www.canonical.com

-- 
Brad Figg brad.figg at canonical.com http://www.canonical.com