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

[Maarten Vanraes]

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