[gentoo-dev] News item: sys-libs/db old SLOT removal

[gentoo-dev] News item: sys-libs/db old SLOT removal

[David Seifert]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2375 bytes --]

The old Berkeley DB slots need to go at this point. The Base Project has
decided to consider BDB a deprecated database backend, and we'll slowly
be working towards a (possibly) BDB-free ::gentoo some time in the long-
term future.

  * * *

Title: sys-libs/db old SLOT removal
Author: David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org>
Posted: 2021-05-26
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 2.0
Display-If-Installed: sys-libs/db:1
Display-If-Installed: sys-libs/db:3
Display-If-Installed: sys-libs/db:4.2
Display-If-Installed: sys-libs/db:4.3
Display-If-Installed: sys-libs/db:4.4
Display-If-Installed: sys-libs/db:4.5
Display-If-Installed: sys-libs/db:4.6
Display-If-Installed: sys-libs/db:4.7
Display-If-Installed: sys-libs/db:5.1

On 1st June, we will mask the following Berkeley DB (aka sys-libs/db)
slots for removal from the tree within 60 days (bug #792222):

- 1
- 3
- 4.2
- 4.3
- 4.4
- 4.5
- 4.6
- 4.7
- 5.1

You should export your data first before rebuilding any applications
against newer slots of sys-libs/db.

Furthermore, the Gentoo Base System Team has decided to consider
sys-libs/db a deprecated database backend. What this means for you is
that we will slowly start deprecating optional use of sys-libs/db in
consumers and mask their USE="berkdb" flags with the goal of eventual
removal of berkdb support from those packages.

Other distros such as Fedora have started a gradual phase-out of
Berkeley DB too, given Oracle's strong-armed approach to community
input and their arguably hostile switch to the AGPLv3
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Libdb_deprecated). Furthermore,
Oracle is known to remove critical features from BDB in patch releases,
such as the removal of the client-server architecture and the SQL API
between 18.1.32 and 18.1.40.

To this end, we will also be removing USE="berkdb" from
profiles/default/linux/make.defaults. If you implicitly depend on
profiles enabling optional use of sys-libs/db, you will need to enable
this USE flag yourself, beginning 1st June.

From here on, you should be working under the assumption that the
sys-libs/db package will be gone from the Gentoo repository within
**two years** from the time of this news item. If you depend on BDB in
a production environment, we strongly suggest you move to one of the
modern replacements, such as GDBM, SQLite or LMDB.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] News item: sys-libs/db old SLOT removal

[Patrick McLean]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Thu, 27 May 2021 00:41:23 +0200
David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org> wrote:

> The old Berkeley DB slots need to go at this point. The Base Project has
> decided to consider BDB a deprecated database backend, and we'll slowly
> be working towards a (possibly) BDB-free ::gentoo some time in the long-
> term future.

I think we should keep at least one non AGPLv3 berkdb in the tree as long
as we have any packages that unconditionally depend on it. June 1st is
too short a time frame for masking pre AGPLv3 berkdb versions. I think it
is reasonable to fix packages that either force berkdb USE flags on in their
deps, or have a hard dep (either by updating/fixing or last-rite).


> Other distros such as Fedora have started a gradual phase-out of
> Berkeley DB too, given Oracle's strong-armed approach to community
> input and their arguably hostile switch to the AGPLv3
> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Libdb_deprecated). Furthermore,
> Oracle is known to remove critical features from BDB in patch releases,
> such as the removal of the client-server architecture and the SQL API
> between 18.1.32 and 18.1.40.

Gradual phase-out is also the approach we should take. Dropping non
AGPLv3 version sort of immediately forces the issue for users that
can't or won't accept that license.

> To this end, we will also be removing USE="berkdb" from
> profiles/default/linux/make.defaults. If you implicitly depend on
> profiles enabling optional use of sys-libs/db, you will need to enable
> this USE flag yourself, beginning 1st June.
> 
> From here on, you should be working under the assumption that the
> sys-libs/db package will be gone from the Gentoo repository within
> **two years** from the time of this news item. If you depend on BDB in
> a production environment, we strongly suggest you move to one of the
> modern replacements, such as GDBM, SQLite or LMDB.

This makes sense for end users, but we should fix ::gentoo before we
force it on our users.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEE4/aZebtLiSjaeOPRfL9E71w1CIMFAmCu1TgACgkQfL9E71w1
CIMU4A//RRAogOgwFcjLpDy3Xb5oJLVBfdO5XOhaYsVi8omafDS5lMdS2MlXE1t1
F6t3Q69yJ3vTxd7wVArnhEQCAqNpjUgRu8wFmmWQTy8hj5qOhLJEdirY1m6RqS//
BNjPYTPfPUsPyR112QZSxQ0X5YzoWJWHM2IBQ3ccDaVskHPpQTUPnfIJ72p4v69H
fNZQMDEPI9SsIL3iZtjFl9E00/FHZy24VXDyQqOAuIeE34V6Bt2Ph1Zw9ZxPlZCM
iybwOVMIfR3eAPIz6HZK1ImyFo6srBjyky1lOVQ5fgGi/vMDrID4YH6effD71DUM
mZkxLPYl78Pyzd20fK2ca0udc7HgEVqyoCcgpVzdpVzHpwwaVGWYl8HL1FCJlING
hgO4eMMbSaMVK8dMUvA/uUt1oLJVYXSFjPBGtg16lPjLCOY6UZsv6L5Lxs/tbqJa
GU0rRMuUJ2FqnJebcNfT80st1ZS+x14xy6Xg6e20+NKXMMzmBlnWZyDn5Z5ZBFAK
aHE4llH2a9lNSAis8z7sW0mm92Zy65LhZrtYbmhPtfoXlwHOzGdev/5ifTjnFhl4
w70XzeRtHHZTzCbBHTPO+e/14lVV8zG5LNCc1+FYeD73XCDxrnBP/8Eavns0/zf7
IHyCWJQ5T4y6gr4Gpjmo3urhzTBX9sR4arFYefSshGiNB/hRgfE=
=3x1D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] News item: sys-libs/db old SLOT removal

[David Seifert]

On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 16:09 -0700, Patrick McLean wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2021 00:41:23 +0200
> David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > The old Berkeley DB slots need to go at this point. The Base Project
> > has
> > decided to consider BDB a deprecated database backend, and we'll
> > slowly
> > be working towards a (possibly) BDB-free ::gentoo some time in the
> > long-
> > term future.
> 
> I think we should keep at least one non AGPLv3 berkdb in the tree as
> long
> as we have any packages that unconditionally depend on it. June 1st is
> too short a time frame for masking pre AGPLv3 berkdb versions. I think
> it
> is reasonable to fix packages that either force berkdb USE flags on in
> their
> deps, or have a hard dep (either by updating/fixing or last-rite).

Have you looked at which versions will remain in the tree? Slots 4.8 and
5.3 are non-AGPL, and given the number of projects unlikely to support
>=6, it's unlikely that 5.3 will ever go away.

> > Other distros such as Fedora have started a gradual phase-out of
> > Berkeley DB too, given Oracle's strong-armed approach to community
> > input and their arguably hostile switch to the AGPLv3
> > (  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Libdb_deprecated).
> > Furthermore,
> > Oracle is known to remove critical features from BDB in patch
> > releases,
> > such as the removal of the client-server architecture and the SQL
> > API
> > between 18.1.32 and 18.1.40.
> 
> Gradual phase-out is also the approach we should take. Dropping non
> AGPLv3 version sort of immediately forces the issue for users that
> can't or won't accept that license.

Again, the premise of this argument is wrong (see above), so I won't go
into more detail here.

> > To this end, we will also be removing USE="berkdb" from
> > profiles/default/linux/make.defaults. If you implicitly depend on
> > profiles enabling optional use of sys-libs/db, you will need to
> > enable
> > this USE flag yourself, beginning 1st June.
> > 
> > From here on, you should be working under the assumption that the
> > sys-libs/db package will be gone from the Gentoo repository within
> > **two years** from the time of this news item. If you depend on BDB
> > in
> > a production environment, we strongly suggest you move to one of the
> > modern replacements, such as GDBM, SQLite or LMDB.
> 
> This makes sense for end users, but we should fix ::gentoo before we
> force it on our users.

This is a message to users, obviously we won't just randomly delete the
ebuilds unless ::gentoo is fixed. This is about managing expectations
for users, not an internal TODO list for gentoo developers.

Re: [gentoo-dev] News item: sys-libs/db old SLOT removal

[Thomas Deutschmann]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1198 bytes --]

On 2021-05-27 00:41, David Seifert wrote:
> Furthermore, the Gentoo Base System Team has decided to consider
> sys-libs/db a deprecated database backend.

Uh? When did that happen? While there is no development happening 
anymore in old versions, 5.3 is feature complete, stable and a good 
choice for small setups like a postfix setup with the need for a few 
lookup tables. It's offering features you don't find anywhere else.

As long as 5.3 keeps building... there shouldn't be any need to kill it. 
It's not even blocking anything because it has no deps.


> Other distros such as Fedora have started a gradual phase-out of
> Berkeley DB too, given Oracle's strong-armed approach to community
> input and their arguably hostile switch to the AGPLv3
> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Libdb_deprecated). Furthermore,
> Oracle is known to remove critical features from BDB in patch releases,
> such as the removal of the client-server architecture and the SQL API
> between 18.1.32 and 18.1.40.

This paragraph doesn't belong into a news item.


-- 
Regards,
Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer
fpr: C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] News item: sys-libs/db old SLOT removal

[Lars Wendler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1707 bytes --]

Hi Thomas,

On Fri, 28 May 2021 15:13:41 +0200 Thomas Deutschmann wrote:

>On 2021-05-27 00:41, David Seifert wrote:
>> Furthermore, the Gentoo Base System Team has decided to consider
>> sys-libs/db a deprecated database backend.
>
>Uh? When did that happen?

We've discussed this at length in #gentoo-base and nobody complained.

> While there is no development happening 
>anymore in old versions, 5.3 is feature complete, stable and a good 
>choice for small setups like a postfix setup with the need for a few 
>lookup tables. It's offering features you don't find anywhere else.
>
>As long as 5.3 keeps building... there shouldn't be any need to kill
>it. It's not even blocking anything because it has no deps.

Well, it's abandoned by upstream so potential bugs will never get fixed
officially. Perhaps if some distros decide to continue maintenance of
the source code we can consider keeping the package but I don't see that
happen...

>> Other distros such as Fedora have started a gradual phase-out of
>> Berkeley DB too, given Oracle's strong-armed approach to community
>> input and their arguably hostile switch to the AGPLv3
>> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Libdb_deprecated).
>> Furthermore, Oracle is known to remove critical features from BDB in
>> patch releases, such as the removal of the client-server
>> architecture and the SQL API between 18.1.32 and 18.1.40.
>
>This paragraph doesn't belong into a news item.

I think this should belong into the news item in order to explain our
rationale behind this decision.


Kind regards
-- 
Lars Wendler
Gentoo package maintainer
GPG: 21CC CF02 4586 0A07 ED93  9F68 498F E765 960E 9B39

[-- Attachment #2: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]