Review process and responsibilities for kernel source package inclusion in main

Registered by Steve Langasek on 2012-04-26

The 12.04 release includes 7 separate kernel source packages in main, not all of which are packages which Canonical has an interest in providing long-term security support for. Discuss how to best provide kernels in the archive that should not be security supported, or give the appearance of being security-supported based on component. Also come up with a plan for reviewing the set of kernels each cycle and dropping abandoned ones from the archive.

Blueprint information

Status:
Not started
Approver:
Colin Watson
Priority:
High
Drafter:
Steve Langasek
Direction:
Needs approval
Assignee:
None
Definition:
New
Series goal:
None
Implementation:
Unknown
Milestone target:
None

Related branches

Sprints

Whiteboard

Example: linux-qcm-msm was seeded into main in lucid, but without its metapackage, and this was never reviewed even though support for the kernel (per https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/Dev/ABIPackages) was dropped even before the first lucid point release. The source package has sat since in the archive, unchanged and in main, all the way to the next LTS and is still there in precise. We should make sure that kernel packages are not promoted to main before it's clear they should be supported, that it's clear who's responsible for requesting package removal/demotion if that changes, and that there's a review each cycle of the kernels that remain.

(?)

Work Items