diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001497.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001497.html | 108 |
1 files changed, 108 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001497.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001497.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9db444da6 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001497.html @@ -0,0 +1,108 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Mirror%20layout%2C%20round%20two&In-Reply-To=%3C201011291314.08739.stormi%40laposte.net%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="001495.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="001503.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two</H1> + <B>Samuel Verschelde</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Mirror%20layout%2C%20round%20two&In-Reply-To=%3C201011291314.08739.stormi%40laposte.net%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two">stormi at laposte.net + </A><BR> + <I>Mon Nov 29 13:14:08 CET 2010</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="001495.html">[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="001503.html">[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#1497">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#1497">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#1497">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#1497">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE> +Le lundi 29 novembre 2010 12:46:22, andre999 a écrit : +><i> As already commented in previous posts, I would rather see this split +</I>><i> into 2 parts : +</I>><i> 1) core = really core (or very useful) to a fully functional desktop or +</I>><i> server or developer system. +</I>><i> Examples include packages for the kernel, usual Linux utilities and +</I>><i> development tools, drivers, drak* and associated tools, complete desktop +</I>><i> environments (such as Gnome, KDE, LXDE), and common applications such as +</I>><i> LibreOffice (successor to Go-Openoffice) and Firefox. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> This would essentially be a subset (most) of Mandriva main, with +</I>><i> possibly some from Mandriva contrib. These packages may not depend on +</I>><i> packages in extra. +</I>><i> Every effort must be collectively made to ensure that packages in this +</I>><i> group are maintained. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> and +</I>><i> +</I>><i> 2) extra = supplementary packages which, if they break, will not affect +</I>><i> core. +</I>><i> This is essentially all (or least all maintained) of Mandriva contrib +</I>><i> and much of Mandriva main. +</I>><i> Typical examples include calendar printing programs, poedit (for +</I>><i> translators), and games. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Extra would probably be much larger than main. (After eliminating +</I>><i> non-functional non-maintained packages.) +</I> +I agree with andre999 on this point : the "everything in core" approach makes no distinction between packages which I can trust (for servers for example) and packages which I can't rely on. + +It was said early that you just have to look at whether the package has a maintainer or not to make a distinction, but this is not sufficient. A maintainer can be very active in cauldron but not care about maintaining for stable releases. A package can have no maintainer but be actively supported in practice (by everybody in cauldron, by security team in stable releases). + +The current main vs contrib approach in mandriva is very sensible. It has some (minor, to me) drawbacks, but when I install packages from main I *know* there will be security updates, bugfix updates, and a QA process that packages in contrib don't have. Do we plan to have no QA process at all in Mageia ? If we plan to have such processes, does the merge between core and extra make is efficient ? I guess we don't plan to have all packages (even maintained ones) equally supported with a full QA process (doesn't seem realistic) ? + +If we define collectively what "core" contains, then we can ensure that every package there has : +- a maintainer who takes care of it in cauldron +- a maintainer who takes care of security and bugfix updates in stable release (maybe the same person, maybe not) +- (when doable) a maintainer who takes care of backports for this package (maybe the same person, maybe not) +- a QA team which will review changes on stable releases for these packages + +Packages in core get the "QA approved" stamp whereas packages in extra get none. + +Therefore I'm against the merge of core and extra. + +Regards + +Samuel Verschelde + +</PRE> + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="001495.html">[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="001503.html">[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#1497">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#1497">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#1497">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#1497">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + +<hr> +<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list</a><br> +</body></html> |