Drop mediawiki from Xenial
| Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | Debian |
Fix Released
|
Unknown
|
||
| | mediawiki (Ubuntu) |
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
Bug Description
Package was removed from debian unstable[1]; maybe ubuntu should do the same?
| Changed in debian: | |
| status: | Unknown → New |
| RichardNeill (ubuntu-richardneill) wrote : | #1 |
| Yongmin Hong (revi) wrote : | #2 |
That's a good idea - but someone have to package currently supported releases, and nobody (debian removed the mediawiki package, as I wrote it in description) is doing it. Upstream is certainly interested in this, but they aren't going to do it by themselves in the near future. [1] MediaWiki 1.19 is not supported since May 2015 and is not getting secuirty updates. It is more dangerous to leave unsupported, not maintained, (possibly-
[1]: https:/
| Changed in debian: | |
| status: | New → Fix Released |
| Jeremy Bicha (jbicha) wrote : | #3 |
Deleted on 2015-12-21 by Colin Watson
(From Debian) RoQA; not suitable for a stable release, outdated version; Debian bug #805588
mediawiki was removed from Ubuntu 16.04 LTS before its release.
It was recently re-introduced to Debian so it might be present in future Debian and Ubuntu releases.
| Changed in mediawiki (Ubuntu): | |
| status: | New → Fix Released |
| Doug Smythies (dsmythies) wrote : | #4 |
Now that mediawiki is back in 16.10, will the newer version be backported to 16.04?
We only publish the Ubuntu Serverguide for LTS releases and do not want to add some note that it may or may not be there. See also bug #1644701 .
That seems a bad idea to me - the entire point of a "distribution" is that it packages and distributes software, so that the sysadmin doesn't have to do it by hand. But we should be shipping a current release.