Updates to Mesa in an LTS - How do you get one?

[Philip Wyett]

On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 19:20 +0100, Philip Wyett wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Once upon a time :-)
> 
> Six months ago I filed a bug against Mesa for Ubuntu 8.04.
> 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mesa/+bug/283175
> 
> I supplied the effects, test case and even a backported patch. This then
> gets wishlisted to sit idle for six months until today.
> 
> After pain of dealing with the RC Mesa in Ubuntu 8.04 ever since, I
> decided to email the technical board about why it and all releases
> should be based on a full release of Mesa + patches only, giving
> developers a clean base to work with. Mark Shuttleworth replied in a
> positive manner and indicated the prime example of why yes we should
> which was Firefox. This then got taken to this list and the public and
> after I filed the following general bug for an update of Mesa complete
> to a release.
> 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mesa/+bug/344710
> 
> Today the bug above was marked 'won't fix' as was submitted:
> 
> Indeed this has sat orphaned for too long already. I close it as wontfix
> now, since it is really not worth (potentially) breaking existing
> installations to introduce new code.
> 
> ** Changed in: mesa (Ubuntu Hardy)
>        Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
> 

Sorry for the cut and paste error. Above should read.

mesa is a central piece of the X.org stack and thus any regressions in
it are potentially grave. Instead of tentatively updating the entire
version, we should backport particular fixes that we are interested in
and which can be verified/regression tested more easily.

** Changed in: mesa (Ubuntu Hardy)
       Status: New => Won't Fix

> I raised the example of my first bug report at the top with Martin Pitti
> on IRC and was told this should also be closed as 'won't fix'. Now
> totally sick and wondering why contribute I agreed. The bug was closed
> thus by Martin:
> 
> Indeed this has sat orphaned for too long already. I close it as wontfix
> now, since it is really not worth (potentially) breaking existing
> installations to introduce new code.
> 
> ** Changed in: mesa (Ubuntu Hardy)
>        Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
> 
> OK, that is the background. How do you successfully get an update? I
> think I have tried to do my part and contribute.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Phil
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/attachments/20090415/088077d4/attachment.sig>