1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20How%20will%20be%20the%20realese%20cycle%3F&In-Reply-To=%3C201010041409.32427.bgmilne%40multilinks.com%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="000794.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="000803.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?</H1>
<B>Buchan Milne</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20How%20will%20be%20the%20realese%20cycle%3F&In-Reply-To=%3C201010041409.32427.bgmilne%40multilinks.com%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?">bgmilne at multilinks.com
</A><BR>
<I>Mon Oct 4 15:09:32 CEST 2010</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="000794.html">[Mageia-dev] Happy Birthday Gene
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="000803.html">[Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#802">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#802">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#802">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#802">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>On Saturday, 2 October 2010 09:34:23 Olivier Méjean wrote:
><i> Le samedi 2 octobre 2010 02:09:47, nicolas vigier a écrit :
</I>><i> > This rolling release already exists, it's called the backport
</I>><i> > repository. But don't expect the same stability as the fixed release,
</I>><i> > you can't have both.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Well, i disagree for a good reason, in free software there is no (or mainly
</I>><i> no) separation between new versions of a software only correcting bugs, and
</I>><i> new versions of the same software adding new functionnalities. Let's take
</I>><i> an example, digikam.
</I>><i> Changes from digikam 1.3 to 1.4 are bugs correction affecting digikam 1.3
</I>><i> and addition of new functionnalities. So what ? I need digikam more stable
</I>><i> so let's use the version that corrects bugs, so the latest, but it also
</I>><i> adds new functionnalities that may provide bugs ... (and in the case of
</I>><i> Digikam 1.4 it requires KDE 4.5, unfortunately there is no update to KDE
</I>><i> 4.5 for Mandriva 2010 !) what to do ?
</I>
urpmi --searchmedia Backports digikam
(see <A HREF="http://lists.mandriva.com/changelog/2010-09/msg01089.php">http://lists.mandriva.com/changelog/2010-09/msg01089.php</A>)
If you have no regressions, use it, and report back to maintainer, or
contributor who backported it, and motivate for promotion to update.
If you have regressions, revert to version on main/release or main/updates,
report bugs upstream, await bugfixes from upstream.
Unless you're actually running 2010.0, in which case you seem to not support
your entire wish by your actions ....
><i> I also add that creating backports is creating new packages for older
</I>><i> versions that is more time to compilation, more time to ensure quality,
</I>><i> and so. In the whole i am not sure that it.
</I>
If you want rolling release, with all that brings (including sometimes,
untested packages, or packages that are not yet complete, but have to be
uploaded to allow completion of a difficult build dependency chain), run cooker.
If you want stable release with updated packages, request (or contribute!)
backports.
[...]
><i> So one cannot say that stability is affected by backport when backported
</I>><i> packages are to correct existing bugs (but maybe adding new bugs due to new
</I>><i> functionnalities). Noboby would say that KDE 4.1 is more stable than KDE
</I>><i> 4.5 but there is no means to update KDE 4.x to KDE 4.x+1 at the moment,
</I>><i> and i consider that must be in update policies. With Mandriva 2010 i am
</I>><i> stick to 4.3.5 and i bet there will be no more evolution for KDE 4.3
</I>><i> branch.
</I>
Wait, you're complaining that software in the distribution is too old, but
you're running the previous release of the distribution (2010.0 I guess, but
you aren't clear).
Regards,
Buchan
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="000794.html">[Mageia-dev] Happy Birthday Gene
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="000803.html">[Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#802">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#802">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#802">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#802">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<hr>
<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev
mailing list</a><br>
</body></html>
|
