From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006722.html | 113 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 113 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006722.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006722.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006722.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006722.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ad7433854 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006722.html @@ -0,0 +1,113 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] new mgarepo version + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] new mgarepo version

+ Samuel Verschelde + stormi at laposte.net +
+ Sat Jul 16 12:34:42 CEST 2011 +

+
+ +
Le samedi 16 juillet 2011 12:20:22, Michael Scherer a écrit :
+> Le samedi 16 juillet 2011 à 11:36 +0200, Samuel Verschelde a écrit :
+> > Le samedi 16 juillet 2011 03:02:21, Michael Scherer a écrit :
+> > > Wasn't it against the policy ( ie, this is neither a bugfix, this is a
+> > > version update, providing feature ) ?
+> > 
+> > Strictly speaking, maybe, but the policy says "Things are not set in
+> > stone, but we need a policy to move ahead with releasing updates for
+> > mga1, and we can refine the process as we find issues/shortcomings.",
+> > and I think this is one of the cases where we can allow updates, to ease
+> > packager's work. We could add "updates of mageia distribution building
+> > tools are allowed to ensure that packagers using stable releases have
+> > the same tools than those using cauldron"
+> 
+> Personally, I would prefer that we first refine the policy and then act
+> rather than the contrary :)
+> 
+
+Indeed :)
+
+> And so, if we provides newer version of tools, what is wrong with using
+> backports for that ?
+> 
+> I am not keen on pushing our newer tool on update, since we plan to have
+> our server using mageia, and so in the futur, if we push newer iurt,
+> mgarepo, rpmlint, they may potentially disrupt build system. So by being
+> clear and using backports, we would avoid such problem more easily.
+
+Except if you plan to use those newer version on the build system, in which 
+case sending to updates_testing to have them well tested then pushed to 
+updates would avoid having to install backports on the BS ?
+
+Samuel
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1