diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/006142.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/006142.html | 109 |
1 files changed, 109 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/006142.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/006142.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b8bfd1b54 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/006142.html @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Proposal%20of%20a%20backporting%20process&In-Reply-To=%3C4E0B7ACE.9030300%40laposte.net%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="006138.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="006070.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process</H1> + <B>andre999</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Proposal%20of%20a%20backporting%20process&In-Reply-To=%3C4E0B7ACE.9030300%40laposte.net%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process">andr55 at laposte.net + </A><BR> + <I>Wed Jun 29 21:19:42 CEST 2011</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="006138.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="006070.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#6142">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#6142">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#6142">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#6142">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Michael Scherer a écrit : +><i> Le mercredi 29 juin 2011 à 10:56 +0200, Angelo Naselli a écrit : +</I>>><i> mercoledì 29 giugno 2011 alle 00:23, andre999 ha scritto: +</I>>>><i> A leaf package is a package that is not required by any other package. +</I>>>><i> But leaf packages will always require something else. +</I>>>><i> If B requires A, then A is not a leaf package, even though B could be. +</I>>>><i> When backporting B, we test to make sure that it works with release A. +</I>>>><i> Obviously it restricts what can be backported, but the trade-off is that backports will +</I>>>><i> (almost always) work, and they won't break anything. +</I>>><i> +</I>>><i> Well my point is i often backport something for my job (for the most +</I>>><i> commoncpp2 now, ucommon in future), and since they are libraries i can fall +</I>>><i> in errors. I always tested before backporting though, and i haven't had any problems +</I>>><i> upgrading, but that's me and i could have been lucky. +</I>>><i> +</I>>><i> If we can accept some exceptions from time to time, but proved (bug open, testing +</I>>><i> and updates/backports etc) i can think to have mageia not only at home or in a virtual +</I>>><i> box. Otherwise i can't see the need of backports, for me of course. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> If we start to add exception while we do not even have started to agree +</I>><i> on the general case, we are never gonna go anywhere :) +</I>><i> +</I>><i> I have the impression that everybody want to be able at the same time to +</I>><i> backport anything, and yet expect to have the same level of support and +</I>><i> quality, and without using any more ressources. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Technically, anything could be backported with proper tests. After all, +</I>><i> that's roughly the process we use for cauldron ( ie, take a new version +</I>><i> of software, compile it on the distribution, and build later others +</I>><i> software against that ). +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Every software have someone interested, from low level like kernel +</I>><i> ( backported on kernel-linus, asked by people as seen on MIB ), or gcc +</I>><i> ( gcc 4.6 being my main motivation for keeping a cooker installation ) +</I>><i> to higher level like gajim or midori. The only thing that no one would +</I>><i> be interested is stuff that do not move ( at, linpng, etc ), ie +</I>><i> everything were there is no new features, and working fine. And even, +</I>><i> people could want to have a new feature, such as systemd, etc. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> So in the end, if we want to satisfy everybody, the answer is to have no +</I>><i> policy forbidding anything and just say "do proper amount of QA". That's +</I>><i> fine by me ( especially since I do not use backports ), but we have to +</I>><i> agree on that. +</I> +I see this as an argument for having simple, clean basic rules (the "general case"), on +which we can have well-defined exceptions, some (or all) of which may require +case-by-case approval. + +So let's accept the initial proposal as the base rules. +Then define some well-defined exceptions, for use cases that fall outside these base +rules. And whether each particular exception should require case-by-case approval. + +-- +André +</PRE> + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="006138.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="006070.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#6142">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#6142">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#6142">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#6142">[ 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> |