diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016420.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016420.html | 144 |
1 files changed, 144 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016420.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016420.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9de80c937 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016420.html @@ -0,0 +1,144 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion) + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Backports%20policy%20clarification%20%28and%20discussion%29&In-Reply-To=%3Cso7ja9-lc3.ln1%40psd.motzarella.org%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="016421.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="016425.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)</H1> + <B>blind Pete</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Backports%20policy%20clarification%20%28and%20discussion%29&In-Reply-To=%3Cso7ja9-lc3.ln1%40psd.motzarella.org%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)">0123peter at gmail.com + </A><BR> + <I>Tue Jun 12 09:30:03 CEST 2012</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="016421.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion) +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="016425.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion) +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#16420">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#16420">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#16420">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#16420">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Samuel Verschelde wrote: + +><i> I re-read the backports policy, and there's a part I think needs to be +</I>><i> pointed out before people start to backport packages. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> "We need to ensure that upgrades never fail: cauldron must always have a +</I>><i> higher version/release than in stable releases." +</I>><i> +</I>><i> This statement is true, but implies more than what it says. It means that +</I>><i> we can't backport a package for Mageia 1 with a higher version than what +</I>><i> we have in Mageia 2 release (and updates?) media. And this, until we are +</I>><i> able to take backports into account during upgrades. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Example : +</I>><i> - Mageia 2 has wesnoth 1.10.2 in core/release +</I>><i> - Mageia 1 can't get a higher version in its backports media +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Do you all agree with my understanding of the policy ? +</I>><i> +</I>><i> This is a serious limitation to our ability to backport to Mageia (n-1) +</I>><i> and even to our ability to provide security fixes to backports there (will +</I>><i> not prevent it, but will prevent to do it by a version upgrade, which is +</I>><i> the common way to fix that kind of issue in backports). +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Maybe we shouldn't open backports for Mageia 1, and make sure upgrade to +</I>><i> Mageia 3 can take backports from Mageia 2 into account so that backports +</I>><i> to Mageia 2 are not stopped when Mageia 3 is released. Then we'll be safe. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Samuel +</I> +This might be an interesting way to restate the problem... + +Imagine that example package 1 (ex1) is in mga1 _at the time of release_. +Ex2 is in mga2 _at the time of release_. +Ex3 is in mga3 _at the time of release_. +Ex4 is in cauldron. + +Ignore backports for a moment, and imagine that there has been a +monumental security breach in the example package such that +versions one and two are completely untrustworth and Ex3.1 is +recommended for everyone. + +The obvious thing to do is push updates of Ex3.1 to mga3, mga2, +and mga1, in that order. + +What happens to a system running mga1 plus updates when you +attempt to update it? Would the old ISOs be withdrawn? +Or re-released with Ex3.1? +Or would you have to wait for an emergency release of mga4? +Or could a separate "update" iso be released along side +the pre-existing isos? +Or could on-line updates be made compulsory? + +-- +blind Pete +Sig goes here... + +</PRE> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="016421.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion) +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="016425.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion) +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#16420">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#16420">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#16420">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#16420">[ 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> |