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-June/005260.html | 189 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 189 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005260.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005260.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005260.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005260.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b139236c1 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005260.html @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] Missing packages in Mageia 1. How to backport? + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] Missing packages in Mageia 1. How to backport?

+ Wolfgang Bornath + molch.b at googlemail.com +
+ Thu Jun 9 12:03:44 CEST 2011 +

+
+ +
2011/6/9 Colin Guthrie <mageia at colin.guthr.ie>:
+> 'Twas brillig, and Christiaan Welvaart at 09/06/11 10:40 did gyre and
+> gimble:
+>> On Thu, 9 Jun 2011, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
+>>
+>>> otoh, perhaps a missing package is also a bugfix... maybe we could
+>>> file bug
+>>> reports for missing packages and go through the updates route...
+>>
+>> Filing bug reports is not a bad idea, even if the new package will go to
+>> backports. Just explain a little why it is important (to fix this in a
+>> stable release).
+>>
+>> We probably need a new "version" in bugzilla because mga1+backports is
+>> basically a new distro. A bug in backports shouldn't be filed against
+>> "1" IMHO.
+
+There's already a lot of requests for missing packages in Bugzilla,
+the question about filing such bug reports was answered long ago.
+
+> As I said in my original mail I really don't think backports is the
+> right approach.
+>
+> I'd prefer to have a 3rd party repo than abuse backports to get the
+> missing packages.
+
+I thought we will try to avoid 3rd party repos?
+
+> I think updates would be the right place.
+>
+> Perhaps we can make the submission process check to see if there already
+> exists a package and if not, allow packagers to submit directly to
+> core/updates? That way the first version of the package will make it to
+> updates but subsequent changes will have to go via QA?
+>
+> While the "oops I messed up the first version" problem could happen, it
+> would at least keep the burden on the packager for the majority of cases
+> which is how we want it (from my understanding of the previous messages
+> on this thread).
+
+-- 
+wobo
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

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