diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/007042.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/007042.html | 122 |
1 files changed, 122 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/007042.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/007042.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..d2cda85d3 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/007042.html @@ -0,0 +1,122 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Proposal for backport process and policy + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Proposal%20for%20backport%20process%20and%20policy&In-Reply-To=%3C4E2F64BD.2050502%40laposte.net%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="007000.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="007103.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Proposal for backport process and policy</H1> + <B>andre999</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Proposal%20for%20backport%20process%20and%20policy&In-Reply-To=%3C4E2F64BD.2050502%40laposte.net%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Proposal for backport process and policy">andr55 at laposte.net + </A><BR> + <I>Wed Jul 27 03:07:09 CEST 2011</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="007000.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal for backport process and policy +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="007103.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal for backport process and policy +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#7042">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#7042">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#7042">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#7042">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Samuel Verschelde a écrit : +><i> Le mardi 26 juillet 2011 07:56:36, blind Pete a écrit : +</I>>><i> on Tue, 26 Jul 2011 08:34 +</I>>><i> in the Usenet newsgroup gmane.linux.mageia.devel +</I>>><i> Samuel Verschelde wrote: +</I>>><i> +</I>>><i> [snip] +</I>>><i> +</I>>>><i> *** Old backports *** +</I>>>><i> Remove old backports when newer ones are submitted +</I>>>><i> - otherwise we let people use old bugged or plagged with security issues +</I>>>><i> packages, when they don't necessarily know that there are problems with +</I>>>><i> them - simpler choice : users have to choose between the version in +</I>>>><i> updates and the one in backports, not more +</I>>>><i> - less space on mirrors (fear wesnoth and vegastrike multiple backports +</I>>>><i> !) +</I>>>><i> +</I>>>><i> Thank you for reading. +</I>>>><i> +</I>>>><i> Best regards, +</I>>>><i> +</I>>>><i> Samuel Verschelde +</I>>><i> +</I>>><i> It is theoretically possible that there could be multiple versions with +</I>>><i> bug fixes and feature enhancements with no known security problems in any +</I>>><i> of them. FireFox appears to be almost going down that path. I think +</I>>><i> that FF 5 is just FF 4.0.3 with a silly name - please correct me if I am +</I>>><i> wrong - and 5 should obsolete 4. But I can imagine several versions +</I>>><i> existing during the life of a LTS release. +</I>>><i> +</I>>><i> The deletion criteria should be, "there is a vulnerability that that is +</I>>><i> not going to be fixed". That is usually, but not always the same as, +</I>>><i> "there is a new version". +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Are you going to check every existing backport for vulnerabilities so that we +</I>><i> can choose which versions to delete ? If not, I don't think this is realistic +</I>><i> to support 5 versions of the same package at the same time. Let's go with the +</I>><i> simpler approach. +</I> +I can see the point of not keeping multiple packports of larger packages such +as ff. +And the point of keeping things simpler. + +However, often a newer version of a package drops/changes features of older +versions, so it really does makes sense to keep the older version available, +for fallback. This often applies to very small optional modules of some +application. +(On my system there is at least one very old optional module for a package that +I keep for that reason.) + +So my suggestion : for smaller packages, say not more than about 1 M or 5 M, +(where size doesn't present a problem), we keep multiple backports as long as +there are no known security issues. + +><i> Best regards +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Samuel Verschelde +</I> +-- +André +</PRE> + + + + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="007000.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal for backport process and policy +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="007103.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal for backport process and policy +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#7042">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#7042">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#7042">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#7042">[ 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> |