Monthly Updates versus Monthly Images

[Brian Murray]

On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 01:19:17PM -0500, Marc Deslauriers wrote:
> On 13-03-05 08:34 AM, Adam Conrad wrote:
> > TL;DR summary: Monthly updates are harmful, monthly images are cool, let's
> > do the latter without turning them into the former and all frolick happily
> > in fields of time, money, and cheesecake.
> 
> mmm...cheesecake... :)
> 
> <snip>
> >  2) No out-of-band support at all, SRU or security.  The only slight change
> >     from how we do things now would be that security updates destined for
> >     the development release would be built in the security PPA (which does
> >     not build against -proposed), so they don't pick up new dependencies
> >     and can then be copied to the archive and not accidentally get caught
> >     up in library transition snags that hinder their migration to the
> >     release pocket.
> 
> I assume we would do this so the urgent security updates don't get stuck
> in -proposed for a longer than desired timeframe? The problem with doing
> this is it's going to be really hard for us to not collide with version
> numbers, and making sure that subsequent uploads still contain the
> security fix, etc. While it may be worthwhile for a world-burning issue,
> I don't see this as being reasonable for the majority of security
> updates for which we'll simply upload them as usual.
> 
> >  3) We twiddle the phased-updates spec a teensy bit so that P-U-P values
> >     over 100 are treated by update-manager as security/critical updates,
> >     and offered immediately, rather than after the configured update delay,
> >     much as packages in the -security pockets are now offered.  With this
> >     model, we can make the scripts that copy from the security PPA to the
> >     archive set the phased update probability to 101 for security uploads,
> >     and have them treated as "special" by update manager, without having to
> >     actually use the -security pocket and deal with the annoyance of a
> >     pocket that doesn't have a stable base to depend on.
> 
> Pardon my ignorance, but what does a "P-U-P value over 100" mean?

Phased Update Percentage, I believe.

--
Brian Murray