diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016450.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016450.html | 149 |
1 files changed, 149 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016450.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016450.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c7c84866d --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016450.html @@ -0,0 +1,149 @@ +<!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=%3C4FD7D536.2050201%40laposte.net%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="016449.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="016454.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)</H1> + <B>andre999</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=%3C4FD7D536.2050201%40laposte.net%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)">andre999mga at laposte.net + </A><BR> + <I>Wed Jun 13 01:48:06 CEST 2012</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="016449.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion) +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="016454.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion) +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#16450">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#16450">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#16450">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#16450">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>nicolas vigier a écrit : +><i> On Tue, 12 Jun 2012, andre999 wrote: +</I>><i> +</I>><i> +</I>>><i> nicolas vigier a écrit : +</I>>><i> +</I>>>><i> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012, Samuel Verschelde wrote: +</I>>>><i> +</I>>>><i> +</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 to +</I>>>>><i> Mageia 2 are not stopped when Mageia 3 is released. Then we'll be safe. +</I>>>>><i> +</I>>>>><i> +</I>>>><i> I think we cannot have both : +</I>>>><i> - backports with higher version than in next stable release +</I>>>><i> - easy upgrade to next stable release +</I>>>><i> +</I>>>><i> +</I>>><i> Why not ? +</I>>><i> We would have to ensure that the version of the backport is less than or +</I>>><i> equal to the version of the package (backport or not) in the next stable +</I>>><i> release. We just have to follow the versioning policy of updates c.f. +</I>>><i> Cauldron, i.e. an update always has a version less than cauldron. (Which +</I>>><i> allows for adding updates without changing the version of the next +</I>>><i> release.) +</I>>><i> +</I>><i> We are talking about backports, not updates, so we don't care about +</I>><i> versionning policy of updates. +</I> +OK. I was just suggesting that we use the same approach. + +><i> And backports can have higher version +</I>><i> than 'release' repository of next version, that's what this thread is +</I>><i> about. +</I>><i> +</I> +Indeed. +I'm suggesting that in those cases where the version of the backport is +higher than the corresponding package of the next release, we ensure +that the backport will continue to function in the next version. As I +see it, this entails primarily that the dependancies will be available. +We can assume that the dependancies are satisfied where the backport is +initially installed. Given this, if these dependancies (or an update of +these dependancies) will function in next higher release, then I would +say that these conditions would be met, and the backport will continue +to function. Thus we can ensure, by establishing the appropriate +policies, that backports can continue to function with release updates. + +Of course that will mean that in certain cases this won't be possible, +and I would suggest that in those few cases the backport be denied. +Cases such as a dependancy being obsoleted by a package that doesn't +provide all the functions needed by the backport. Not a very common +occurance. +We already have restrictions on backports, so I don't see this as a big +liability in exchange for reliable release updates. + +It is possible that this problem could be solved by creating a backport +for the next stable release, in which case to do the backport for +release N-1 we would have to first create a backport for release N. +This assumes that during or after the update to the new release, one +does a regular update, and that the update will automatically present +backports which apply to already installed backports, even if the +backport repo is closed. +Obviously requiring a certain fine-tuning of the tools. + +-- +André + +</PRE> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="016449.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion) +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="016454.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion) +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#16450">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#16450">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#16450">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#16450">[ 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> |