Tails

#1 Updated by emmapeel 2018-06-12 13:21:31

• Assignee set to sajolida

sajolida, please have a look at this ticket and assign it to me if you feel it should be part of the new Additional Software docs.

#2 Updated by emmapeel 2018-06-12 13:22:21

• Subject changed from Verify (and Document?) Additionnal Software Feature behaviour with apt-key to Verify (and Document?) Additional Software Feature behaviour with apt-key

#3 Updated by sajolida 2018-07-02 12:03:52

• Status changed from New to Confirmed
• Assignee changed from sajolida to emmapeel
• Target version set to Tails_3.9
• Type of work changed from End-user documentation to Research
• Deliverable for set to 299

Indeed, that’s a valid point.

In the current version we are advertising adding additional repos to enable non-free section and that doesn’t require additional APT key:

https://tails.boum.org/doc/advanced_topics/additional_software/index.en.html#index2h1

But in the version we are writing on feature/14594-asp-gui we talk about non-Debian repositories, and these would require additional APT key.

Emma, can you check what it would take to make an additional APT key persistent in Tails?

• If that’s feasible, then I would adjust our new doc to mention this as well.
• If that’s not feasible, then I would adjust our new doc to make it clear that this will not be enough for non-Debian repos.

#4 Updated by Anonymous 2018-08-16 10:58:27

• related to Bug #15609: We do not provide OpenPGP signature for the Additional Software feature Beta ISO added

#5 Updated by Anonymous 2018-08-16 10:58:38

• related to deleted (Bug #15609: We do not provide OpenPGP signature for the Additional Software feature Beta ISO)

#6 Updated by Anonymous 2018-08-16 10:58:53

• related to Feature #14568: Additional Software Packages added

#7 Updated by Anonymous 2018-08-16 10:59:10

• QA Check set to Info Needed

#8 Updated by Anonymous 2018-08-16 11:00:10

• Assignee changed from emmapeel to sajolida

I’m assigning this to sajolida: please let me know if you want to look into it, if emmapeel will do it or if we should ask Alan?

#9 Updated by sajolida 2018-08-19 19:56:24

• Assignee deleted (sajolida)
• Target version deleted (Tails_3.9)
• QA Check deleted (Info Needed)
• Type of work changed from Research to Wait
• Deliverable for deleted (299)

I think that’s outside of the scope of SponorW_2017. Let’s wait some time after 3.9 to see how popular this use case is. Then we’ll have better argument to work on this (my bet is that it will be hard to support this use case well).

#10 Updated by intrigeri 2019-03-08 16:16:39

• Type of work changed from Wait to Research

sajolida wrote:
> I think that’s outside of the scope of SponorW_2017. Let’s wait some time after 3.9 to see how popular this use case is. Then we’ll have better argument to work on this (my bet is that it will be hard to support this use case well).

@sajolida, maybe enough time after 3.9 has passed to do the next steps?

#11 Updated by sajolida 2019-03-13 12:53:49

• Assignee set to sajolida
• Target version set to Tails_3.13
• Parent task set to Feature #15979

If I have time, I’ll try to write a script to extract “=== content of /” from WhisperBack reports as part of Feature #15979. This way we could have easy stats on both Additional Software usage and list of additional repos, if any.

#12 Updated by sajolida 2019-03-15 19:32:43

• blocked by Bug #16563: Configuring additional APT repositories make WhisperBack crash added

#13 Updated by sajolida 2019-03-15 19:32:50

• Target version changed from Tails_3.13 to Tails_3.14

#14 Updated by Anonymous 2019-03-19 10:57:08

• Parent task deleted (Feature #15979)

I’m unparenting this from the deliverable.

#15 Updated by CyrilBrulebois 2019-05-23 21:23:26

• Target version changed from Tails_3.14 to Tails_3.15

#16 Updated by CyrilBrulebois 2019-07-10 10:34:06

• Target version changed from Tails_3.15 to Tails_3.16

#17 Updated by intrigeri 2019-08-30 17:07:29

• Target version deleted (Tails_3.16)

Hi!

We’ve set up an automated process to ask our fellow contributors to update some tickets of theirs, in order to:

• better reflect your plans;
• bring down your amount of work-in-progress to a sustainable level;
• encourage team work and increase the chances that someone finishes the work;
• avoid a human doing ticket triaging and asking you the same questions on each such ticket.

In particular, this process identifies:

• Stalled work-in-progress
• Reviews waiting for a long time

However, in the current state of things, this process is not able to notice those tickets when their Target version has been repeatedly postponed by our Release Managers. Therefore, the ticket triaging team decided on Feature #16545 to remove the Target version whenever in such cases, when it does not feel realistic. This is what I’m doing on this ticket.

You now have a few options, such as:

• Deassign yourself. That’s fine. If it really matters, someone else, possibly you, may pick it up later. Then, if this ticket is relevant for a Tails team, bring it to their attention; else, forget it and take care of yourself :)
• If you think you can realistically come back to it and finish the work in the next 6 months, say so on this ticket, for example by setting a suitable “Target version”. This will communicate your plans to the rest of the project and ensure the task pops up on your radar at a suitable time. Of course, you can still realize later that it is not going to work as planned, and revisit today’s choice.

Cheers!