Please remove fai source package and all resulting binary packages from karmic

[Stephan Rügamer]

Dear Colleagues,

as per discussion with upstream (Thomas Lange) we came to the conclusion that we should remove the FAI package for karmic right now.

As FAI right now is outdated and not working properly (better to say, it doesn't work at all) we would like to not confuse FAI users on ubuntu for that moment.

We will work on FAI for karmic+1 and re-introduce it during the development cycle for karmic+1.

You can reach Thomas Lange via IRC: <email address hidden>

Regards,

\sh

[Henning Sprang (henning)]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Stephan Hermann<email address hidden> wrote:
> As FAI right now is outdated and not working properly (better to say, it
> doesn't work at all)

IMHO that's wrong.

people doing installs from a debian server and manage configs with
fai-client afterwards should be able to use that current(or a simple
newly snced) FAI very well!

And, as I also said in the other post, dirininstall should also work
well, adnd last time I tested, fai-cd was also no problem (even at
times, where ntework installs where problematic already).

It should be enough to remoive the fai-server package.

Henning

--
Henning Sprang
http://www.sprang.de

[Stephan Rügamer (sruegamer)]

well,

we discussed it with Thomas on #fai...

And we have only one possibility: remove FAI source package or nothing...cause we don't remove single binary packages and fai-server is a result of the fai source package.
as we have tomorrow FF and I (nor siretart) don't find the time to upload at least a non working package to karmic, it's difficult.

Thomas wants it to be removed, and I agree here for Karmic. We could, however, try to push some packages to FAIs uni-koeln.de archive some packages for ubuntu, marked as very,very experimental.

Regards,

\sh
PS: Or we discuss it on #fai@oftc right now :)

[Henning Sprang (henning)]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Stephan Hermann<email address hidden> wrote:
> well,
>
> we discussed it with Thomas on #fai...

Well, some people have to work and cannot be always online.
It might be useful to discuss some trhings on a mailing list, so other
people can add their bits of opinions.

> And we have only one possibility: remove FAI source package or nothing...cause we don't remove single binary packages and fai-server is a result of the fai source package.
> as we have tomorrow FF and I (nor siretart) don't find the time to upload at least a  non working package to karmic, it's difficult.

> Thomas wants it to be removed, and I agree here for Karmic

He might not be aware of the reasons I mentioned.

> PS: Or we discuss it on #fai@oftc right now :)

No access to the other world apart from mail right now :(

Henning

--
Henning Sprang
http://www.sprang.de

[Reinhard Tartler (siretart)]

Stephan Hermann <email address hidden> writes:

> And we have only one possibility: remove FAI source package or
> nothing...cause we don't remove single binary packages and fai-server
> is a result of the fai source package.

we'd need to change the fai source package.

> as we have tomorrow FF and I (nor siretart) don't find the time to
> upload at least a non working package to karmic, it's difficult.

that's correct :-(

> Thomas wants it to be removed, and I agree here for Karmic. We could,
> however, try to push some packages to FAIs uni-koeln.de archive some
> packages for ubuntu, marked as very,very experimental.

This would be my preferred way to go.

--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4

[Henning Sprang (henning)]

Again, some clearer arguments:

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Reinhard Tartler<email address hidden> wrote:
>> Thomas wants it to be removed, and I agree here for Karmic.

He's not using it there at all, and never will, and so cannot take the
point of view of a user.

For people actually using it, fai-client works pretty well, and the
things announced here make things more complex for all people who only
want to manage configurations, doing their installs another way (e.g.
from a debian install server, with D-I, with dirinstall).

> We could,
>> however, try to push some packages to FAIs uni-koeln.de archive some
>> packages for ubuntu, marked as very,very experimental.

That's many steps to do in addition for people described above!

Why not do something so someboidy installing the fai-server package is
warned that it will most probably not work?
Why not disable the building of the fai-server package in the build scripts?

Henning

[Stephan Rügamer (sruegamer)]

Dear Colleagues,

I set this bug to confirmed, because upstream (speak thomas Lange) wants this package removed and it's binaries.
Please remove the source pkgs and the binaries from the archives.

Furthermore, please set FAI src pks to the sync-blacklists.

Thx in Advanced,

\sh

[Jonathan Riddell (jr)]

done