[Mageia-dev] Question about backports: calibre (bug 1659)

Tue Jun 14 18:12:49 CEST 2011

> Release frequency never was a criteria for differentiating between
+> pushing something to updates and something to backports.
+
+It should be. Otherwise, we should all be using OpenOffice.org 1.0.1. -- 
+security issues set aside.
+
+> And I see no reason why it would be in favor of doing a bug fix update
+> rather than a backport, especially if we ask to do a more stringent QA
+> checking on updates, as it would put too much work on the team.
+
+Because Mageia (and Mandriva)'s vision of the concept of "backports" is not 
+compatible with my common-sense.
+
+I have not used Mandriva very much in the past, because I hate the concept of
+"backports" -- yes, Ubuntu does them too, but Ubuntu backports are totally
+unsupported, so you can imagine their "quality"... 
+
+I'd rather stick to "updates" -- this is also the reason I stopped using
+Debian, because the morons (yes, morons) were only pushing tzdata updates 
+in "volatile", not in "updates", whereas ALL the other distro weres pushing 
+tzdata updates in "updates".
+
+If Mageia considers that a 6-7 months old package (for an application that
+released 32 times in the meantime) only deserves updates in "backports", 
+then I will probably stop reporting any possible bugs with this distro 
+-- as a protest.
+
+It is indeed a matter of principle. I am personally using the latest 
+calibre installed in /opt, not the official one, but again, it's a 
+matter of principle.
+
+
+Whatever is important and comes from upstream  should go into updates IMHO. 
+Backports, in my view, only make sense if they're  coming from Release N+1 
+*and* if they represent a major version bump -- such as FF4 over FF3.6, etc.
+
+
+WRT calibre, Fedora has a simple way: it keeps a newer calibre packages in 
+updates/testing for 1 week, and if no user complains about regressions, it 
+goes into updates. This is because calibre is a "leaf" package -- no other 
+package depends on it, so it only impacts those who are using it.
+
+> Again, that's not a criteria. Every software is important to at least
+> one person, and that would mean we should update everything if we start
+> to update everything important to one group of users.
+
+I can see how important is calibre to Mageia users. Nobody noticed or cared 
+that it is an antiquated version. They could have as well used notepad.exe 
+from Win95.
+
+
+> And for what it is worth, Fedora is discussing having separate update
+> and backport ( https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/515 ), even if the
+> discussion seems to be going nowhere at the moment
+
+BS. I hope Fedora *never* uses backports!
+
+Their update policy is very clear *and* flexible:
+http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy
+
+Please note these: 
+
+"Exceptions: Some classes of software will not fit in these guidelines. 
+If your package does not fit in one of the classes below, but you think 
+it should be allowed to update more rapidly . . . 
+
+
+Things that would make it more likely to grant a request:
+--  The package is a "leaf" node. Nothing depends on it or requires it."
+
+Calibre is a "leaf" package. 
+
+If not, in the same document:
+
+"All other updates must either:
+-- reach the criteria laid out in the previous section OR
+-- reach the positive Bodhi karma threshold specified by the updates submitter OR
+-- spend some minimum amount of time in updates-testing, currently one week."
+
+I am not sure why F15 stopped updating calibre to 0.8.0 in updates (Rawhide went 
+up to 0.8.4, maybe 0.8.5 now), but for the versions up to and including 0.8.0, 
+here's the dynamics of the updates:
+
+ChangeLog:
+
+* Fri May 6 2011 Kevin Fenzi <kevin at xxxxxxxxx> - 0.8.0-1
+- Update to 0.8.0
+* Wed May 4 2011 Dan HorÃak <dan at xxxxxxxx> - 0.7.59-2
+- rebuilt against podofo 0.9.1
+* Sat Apr 30 2011 Kevin Fenzi <kevin at xxxxxxxxx> - 0.7.59-1
+- Update to 0.7.59
+* Fri Apr 22 2011 Kevin Fenzi <kevin at xxxxxxxxx> - 0.7.57-1
+- Update to 0.7.57
+
+(F15 was released with 0.7.56)
+
+
+Indeed, Mageia does not have the number of packagers that Fedora has. 
+However, if Mageia's _policy_ is to rather have 6-7 months old versions in 
+updates, I should probably realize that Mageia is not for me.
+
+No, I have not, and never will use any repository called "backports". When a 
+newer stable  release of a distro is available, I should update to it if 
+updates I need are not pushed into Release N-1 "updates" (even if that release 
+is officially still supported with security patches), but again, "backports" 
+as Mandriva and Mageia are seeing them -- i.e. backporting 
+from  Cooker/Cauldron, not from "updates/testing" nor from "Release N+1" 
+-- does not fit my Zen.
+
+R-C
+