[owncloud-devel] Bug#815963: Warn users about unsupported upgrade path

Thomas Müller thomas.mueller at tmit.eu
Mon Feb 29 07:25:12 GMT 2016

Am 28. Februar 2016 12:20:30 MEZ, schrieb tflidd <tflidd at aspekte.net>:
>I really appreciate the efforts you put in the improvement of the
>upgrade process and the new integrity check will hopefully reduce
>problems with code of different versions. Just bypassing checks, which
>were put in place for a reason, is not a very good idea.
>Other web applications went the way to provide long term releases
>(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_support), perhaps an idea for
>owncloud? I think, there are a lot of people who like owncloud but who
>are not so enthusiast that they need every new feature. They were happy
>with owncloud 7.0, and now as it reaches EOL they need to upgrade.
>Unfortunately, it's not one, it's a series of upgrades.

A new major version of ownCloud is not only about new features. Fixing some bugs - especially in the area of performance - do require architectural changes which can only go into major versions.
Finally after 18 month we even don't put effort into security updates.

With respect to the maintenance effort I don't see us in the position to provide a  LTS. Sorry.


>This probably requires a different planning and all update-routines
>would have to be adopted.
>Am 28.02.2016 um 11:43 schrieb Lukas Reschke:
>> See also https://github.com/owncloud/core/issues/22313 and
>> https://github.com/owncloud/core/issues/22310
>> We're spending significant time in core on already fixed bugs. I
>> consider this really helpful for us nor our users. This is taking
>> data at risk by intention.
>> - Lukas
>> On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 at 11:15, Lukas Reschke <lukas at statuscode.ch
>> <mailto:lukas at statuscode.ch>> wrote:
>>     I stand with my comments. If some downstream people believe they
>>     know it better than upstream they are illusional and taking user
>>     data at risk. If this doesn't work with the way they distribute
>>     packages they should not distribute it OR add extensive testing
>>     sets to core to prove that updates will work. And of course users
>>     have to follow our update processes. That's why we have code in
>>     place that enforces it. If they remove that then they simply are
>>     not using ownCloud but a fork which should be marked as such. Our
>>     code integrity check will detect such situations. And yes, this
>>     a longterm goal that we're aiming at and there are tickets for
>>     What they do is taking user data at risk AND outsourcing support
>>     to us in case it breaks. An unacceptable move from my PoV.
>>     of randomly deciding that this works downstream should have filed
>>     an issue and worked with us to the goal to support this in
>>     Note that the version that Debian has in stable also is missing
>>     quite a few bug fixes leading to data loss. My blog post recently
>>     highlighted one. Seriously. This whole "we randomly backport
>>     patches that we consider critical" thing is just not suited for
>>     fast evolving web apps like ownCloud.
>>     - Lukas
>>     On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 at 11:00, Klaas Freitag <freitag at owncloud.com
>>     <mailto:freitag at owncloud.com>> wrote:
>>         On 27.02.2016 15:49, Lukas Reschke wrote:
>>         > This is super dangerous stuff from Debian and I*HIGHLY* 
>>         would advise
>>         > anybody from NOT using distribution packages for ownCloud.
>>         >
>>         > Highly irresponsible from them to risk user data like that.
>>         Honestly, the
>>         > maintainer should know better.
>>         Sorry, but this is over the top. Of course debians way of
>>         patching this
>>         is wrong, but have you ever thought about why they do it?
>>         It is completely naive to think that users (using distro
>>         packages or
>>         not) will always follow the upgrade path ownClouds core devs
>>         think is
>>         good. ownCloud isn't the center of the world for everybody.
>>         One could easily argue that ownCloud is badly architected if
>>         it is not
>>         able to detect which version it is updating from and to which
>>         it updates
>>         to. From that information it could be able to build a list of
>>         actions to
>>         perform. Other systems manage to do that. If that is too hard
>>         with the
>>         underlying technology we are using that is a different thing,
>>         but in
>>         means a reason for this bashing comments. That is not helping
>>         anybody.
>>         We should spend our energy to improve things rather than
>>         pointing to
>>         each other. In FOSS we're all in the same boat.
>>         regards,
>>         Klaas
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Devel mailing list
>>         Devel at owncloud.org <mailto:Devel at owncloud.org>
>>         http://mailman.owncloud.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> Devel at owncloud.org
>> http://mailman.owncloud.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>Devel mailing list
>Devel at owncloud.org

Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

More information about the Devel mailing list