[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process

[Michael Scherer]

Le mardi 28 juin 2011 à 09:25 +0200, Angelo Naselli a écrit :
> domenica 26 giugno 2011 alle 13:38, Michael Scherer ha scritto:
> > See the thread about policy, and the part about "only packages that
> > nothing requires should be backported".
> I can't see very well the leaf story... I mean any packages
> require something at least to build. Scripts need interpreters, so
> i'd expect interpreters cannot be backported, but we can find a
> script based package (using perl, ruby or python...) needing some other
> script based one, the same could happen for programs. Now what can
> we backport there?
> A and B are leaves (?) but B uses A so i can revert A for a problem,
> now are we sure A on stable works with B on backports?

if B use A, that mean that A is not a leave package, since something
requires it.


> Morever we could not backport new major libraries, they would not conflicts
> with stable though, but sure they could affect some packages built in backports
> after that should not work without new major.....

Yes. 

There is a moment where we need to answer "do we want to backport all
cauldron on stable", which is basically what we incrementally do with
cauldron", or do we just backport a subset of application where we can
do enough QA because changes are small enough ?

> I'm confused :/
> 
> IMO we should improve the QA (or what else) and testing to allow a safe
> installation and proving that will be upgraded to the next mageia release, 
> then if we call it backports, upgrades, updates or... that's
> another and maybe less important thing.

Proving is easy. The package in release must have a higher EVR than
those on backports. But if we let people do cherry picking, this is much
harder.
-- 
Michael Scherer