Stripping noop configuration file changes from SRUs

[Robie Basak]

Hi Balint,

On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 03:23:30PM +0200, Balint Reczey wrote:
> I found some cases where SRUs (for example for unattended-upgrades)
> listed new default values as comments in the main configuration file.
> Upon upgrade this changed configuration file may trigger a question to
> the system administrator to accept/merge the changes in case the
> configuration file on the system is modified locally. This question
> makes  the upgrade a bit more slower and requires more attention.

Thank you for raising this. It's a good point.

I've always considered the introduction of a possible conffile prompt as
problematic in an SRU. Users automatically updating won't even see the
prompt. During an SRU review, if I spot that one is being introduced, I
consider it part of the task of my review to question whether it can be
avoided, and work with the uploader to decide how to handle any
implications this will have either way.

> Even after considering the mentioned downsides I'd like to propose
> adopting the policy of stripping configuration file changes from the
> SRUs unless they are needed as part of the fix to be back-ported to
> make upgrades smoother.

IMHO, this falls under the existing "minimal fix" requirement, so
doesn't need any change in existing SRU policy. I'm in favour of
documenting this specific class of change, however, as one that needs
careful consideration.

Robie
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-release/attachments/20180813/5872f546/attachment.sig>