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/006048.html | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 121 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/006048.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/006048.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/006048.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/006048.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..04568ebb1 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/006048.html @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] Update of backport, policy proposal + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] Update of backport, policy proposal

+ Angelo Naselli + anaselli at linux.it +
+ Sun Jun 26 18:51:39 CEST 2011 +

+
+ +
> Well, in principle this is correct, not in this case as I have
+> explained as a very common example. You can decide whatever you want,
+> if a user wants a certain package and his friend will pack it for him
+> and puts it up on a server, publishing the existence - then you will
+> see what happens. You know by experience how popular such 3rd-party
+> repos can become (see MIB, MUD), just because somebody had a different
+> view than the official view.
+> In short: no matter what is more important or not, you have to find a
+> compromise between the (understandable) search for optimal workflow,
+> security on one side and the real world of the users on the other. I
+> think, the key here is non-technical communication of the
+> circumstances, like "why we can't have foo 1.2 as backport from
+> Cauldron to Mageia 1".
+Well I'm one who backports what he needs, doesn't mean all, just what needs.
+I always enable backports, and i know often how to go on if a backport was
+broken. That's not a point though. 
+I can't see why people that want last release of all must trust 3rd-party
+repos and do not mageia(or mandriva) backport one... it's really hard to me.
+
+I think we can, as said by someone, release all as updates, but we can also 
+consider to have a tested and reliable backport repository (call as you wish
+maybe "next" or "after" :) ) but the real concept to me is that we should
+have the availability to get new sw or version of a sw in a repository that 
+could be different than updates, *could* because case by case we could
+consider to add them in updates and in any case that should be reliable,
+no breakages, no regressions.
+
+We talked about patches, and sometime we could patch sw, but sometime
+it's hard, and updates with an upgrade of such a sw should be the best 
+thing to do. 
+
+Cheers,
+-- 
+	Angelo
+-------------- next part --------------
+A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
+Name: not available
+Type: application/pgp-signature
+Size: 198 bytes
+Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
+URL: </pipermail/mageia-dev/attachments/20110626/2742f31c/attachment.asc>
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

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