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
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Question about backports: calibre (bug 1659)
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Question%20about%20backports%3A%20calibre%20%28bug%201659%29&In-Reply-To=%3C1308058917.24304.209.camel%40akroma.ephaone.org%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="005589.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="005638.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] Question about backports: calibre (bug 1659)</H1>
<B>Michael Scherer</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Question%20about%20backports%3A%20calibre%20%28bug%201659%29&In-Reply-To=%3C1308058917.24304.209.camel%40akroma.ephaone.org%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Question about backports: calibre (bug 1659)">misc at zarb.org
</A><BR>
<I>Tue Jun 14 15:41:56 CEST 2011</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005589.html">[Mageia-dev] Question about backports: calibre (bug 1659)
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="005638.html">[Mageia-dev] Question about backports: calibre (bug 1659)
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#5615">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#5615">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#5615">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#5615">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>Le mardi 14 juin 2011 à 03:00 -0700, Radu-Cristian FOTESCU a écrit :
><i>
</I>><i> > So why does it have to be treated differently than the others since
</I>><i> > there is nothing special about this release cycle ?
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Michael, please give me an example of an application that releases on average 5 time a month. Really, give me an example.
</I>
Release frequency never was a criteria for differentiating between
pushing something to updates and something to backports.
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.
><i> And, like it or not, calibre is _THE_ application for e-book lovers. For e-book users, it's as important as Firefox or
</I>><i> Chromium is for the rest of the people.
</I>
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> Also, Mageia 1.0 was released with a version of this application shamefully old.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Fedora made a better judgment (I might just consider switching to Fedora, although I like Mageia more):
</I>><i> they released F15 with a recent version of calibre, 0.7.56, but they added in updates 0.8.0. For the
</I>><i> time being they stopped at 0.8.0, and only in Rawhide they pushed 0.8.4, which in my opinion is a good
</I>><i> judgment that would be a _balance_ between:
</I>><i>
</I>><i> -- announced bug-fixes
</I>><i> -- announced new features
</I>><i> -- announced new hardware supported
</I>><i> -- ad-hoc assessment of the risk brought by the new features (a heuristic
</I>><i> process based mainly on experience as a user, experience as a software
</I>><i> developer, and common-sense).Of course, the people who _make_ a distro are
</I>><i> its _owners_, and of course the reasoning of those who make Fedora is not
</I>><i> necessarily the best example to be followed by everybody, but as it happens, I prefer their brains.
</I>
You still do not explain where is the problem of using backports for
that.
And for what it is worth, Fedora is discussing having separate update
and backport ( <A HREF="https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/515">https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/515</A> ), even if the
discussion seems to be going nowhere at the moment
--
Michael Scherer
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005589.html">[Mageia-dev] Question about backports: calibre (bug 1659)
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="005638.html">[Mageia-dev] Question about backports: calibre (bug 1659)
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#5615">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#5615">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#5615">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#5615">[ 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>
|
