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

Sat Jun 11 18:01:54 CEST 2011

Op zaterdag 11 juni 2011 16:55:00 schreef Samuel Verschelde:
+> Le samedi 11 juin 2011 14:26:19, Maarten Vanraes a écrit :
+> > Op zaterdag 11 juni 2011 13:14:29 schreef Samuel Verschelde:
+> > > Le samedi 11 juin 2011 12:06:55, Christiaan Welvaart a écrit :
+> > > > On Fri, 10 Jun 2011, Michael Scherer wrote:
+> > > > > We can agree that everybody want something newer for some rpms, but
+> > > > > few people want everything to be newer ( ie, now one run backports
+> > > > > as a update media, I think ). So as much as I am against asking to
+> > > > > users questions, we must show them the choice somewhere, in a non
+> > > > > obstrusive way.
+> > > > 
+> > > > Maybe, but how would be "support" this? We must be able to reproduce
+> > > > a reported problem. This becomes complicated when we don't know what
+> > > > is installed on the user's system. A guideline for bug reporters is
+> > > > (or should be) "make sure you installed the latest updates". What
+> > > > would be the equivalent for backports? I'm afraid it should be "if
+> > > > you installed any backports, make sure you installed all backports
+> > > > that are relevant for your system". If someone has a problem with
+> > > > any other combination, the bug report might be rejected. How would
+> > > > QA even work when only selected packages are upgraded from
+> > > > backports, or integration testing: integration with what?
+> > > > 
+> > > > So the only combinations we can support are:
+> > > >    - release + updates
+> > > >    - release + updates + backports
+> > > > 
+> > > > More practical: for mga1 I have a VM that I can keep updated. For
+> > > > mga1 backports I can install another VM with backports enabled. But
+> > > > for bugs reported with only selected backports installed I suppose I
+> > > > would have to install a new VM with mga1, update it, and install
+> > > > only those backports -
+> > > 
+> > > > for each bug report. But maybe I'm missing something, please explain. 
+(:
+> > > If we suppose that either updates or backports are supported (with a
+> > > support level to be defined), the situation is simpler to me :  a good
+> > > backport must work  with all its dependencies coming from updates or
+> > > release OR it must explicitly require higher versions, found only in
+> > > the backports media and so automatically pulled.
+> > > 
+> > > So I don't think that having picked up only certain backported packages
+> > > is a problem for the maintainer's support. Maybe I over-simplified the
+> > > situation, but I don't think it will be as complex as you say.
+> > > 
+> > > Samuel
+> > 
+> > imho this creates more work for packagers or qa team to support
+> > backports, i'm not really in favor of this solution
+> 
+> So it someone has a problem with a package you backported and reports it in
+> bugzilla, you'll answer "not supported" and close the door ? Then we have
+> not a single chance to have users accept to use backports rather than ask
+> for a rolling release (supposing that we want to stay with stable releases
+> model, which hasn't been decided yet).
+> 
+> In my opinion, a backport must be either supported or not exist. Even in
+> Mandriva, where everybody keep saying "backports ain't supported", usually
+> people try to solve the problems caused by backports.
+> 
+> However, the level of support can be different between backports and
+> updates, as I said in my previous message. The differences are yet to
+> define, but here are some I see :
+> - when a critical bug in a backport exists, you can simply update to a
+> newer version and see if it's solved
+> - if the program already is in its the latest version and has an upstream
+> bug, you can answer "report the bug upstream" and stop there until
+> upstream solves the bug. For packages in release or updates, ideally you
+> have to try to help fixing it or work it around because the bug is
+> considered part of the whole distribution.
+> 
+> Best regards
+> 
+> Samuel
+
+What about security fixes? if there's 1 version in release and 10 in backports? 
+do the older backported packages have to be securitypatched?
+
+imho not supported backports means that if backports has an issue, try a newer 
+backports...
+
+imho that is a good level, that doesn't require much effort.
+