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
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Backports%20policy%20clarification%20%28and%20discussion%29&In-Reply-To=%3C4FD32591.1020503%40laposte.net%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="016316.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="016320.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)</H1>
<B>andre999</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Backports%20policy%20clarification%20%28and%20discussion%29&In-Reply-To=%3C4FD32591.1020503%40laposte.net%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)">andre999mga at laposte.net
</A><BR>
<I>Sat Jun 9 12:29:37 CEST 2012</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="016316.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="016320.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#16319">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#16319">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#16319">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#16319">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>Sander Lepik a écrit :
><i> 08.06.2012 11:38, Samuel Verschelde kirjutas:
</I>><i>
</I>>><i> I re-read the backports policy, and there's a part I think needs to be pointed
</I>>><i> out before people start to backport packages.
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> "We need to ensure that upgrades never fail: cauldron must always have a
</I>>><i> higher version/release than in stable releases."
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> This statement is true, but implies more than what it says. It means that we
</I>>><i> can't backport a package for Mageia 1 with a higher version than what we have
</I>>><i> in Mageia 2 release (and updates?) media. And this, until we are able to take
</I>>><i> backports into account during upgrades.
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> Example :
</I>>><i> - Mageia 2 has wesnoth 1.10.2 in core/release
</I>>><i> - Mageia 1 can't get a higher version in its backports media
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> Do you all agree with my understanding of the policy ?
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> This is a serious limitation to our ability to backport to Mageia (n-1) and
</I>>><i> even to our ability to provide security fixes to backports there (will not
</I>>><i> prevent it, but will prevent to do it by a version upgrade, which is the
</I>>><i> common way to fix that kind of issue in backports).
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> Maybe we shouldn't open backports for Mageia 1, and make sure upgrade to
</I>>><i> Mageia 3 can take backports from Mageia 2 into account so that backports to
</I>>><i> Mageia 2 are not stopped when Mageia 3 is released. Then we'll be safe.
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> Samuel
</I>>><i>
</I>><i> I reread the backports policy and there are two lines that make backporting from cauldron to
</I>><i> mga1 impossible:
</I>><i> * Backports can be cherry-picked (ie, enable backports, install, disable backports).
</I>><i> * We need to ensure that upgrades never fail
</I>><i>
</I>><i> In this regard we can support backports only with new version that is lower than the one on
</I>><i> next release. If we want to enable backports for mga1 we can backport only from mga2. Not
</I>><i> from cauldron. This way we can submit updates by submitting new backport into mga1 backports
</I>><i> repo (users would still have to update manually AFAIK).
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Any objections?
</I>><i>
</I>
OK. To backport from Cauldron to mga1, we have to backport from
Cauldron to mga2, (bumping the revision in cauldron to ensure that is is
higher), then backport from mga2 to mga1, ensuring that the revision is
lower in mga1 than in mga2. (e.g. revision x.1 in cauldron, x.0.1 in
mga2, x.0.0.1 in mga1) Pretty straight forward.
- Cherry-picking refers to the users' option to install a backport,
which has nothing to do with the packaging itself.
- Ensure that upgrades never fail : Properly packaged, there is no
reason why any available backports will not install properly, as long as
the tools are appropriately adjusted. Backports should install just as
reliably as regular updates.
Of course, if a particular backport or update is not available, it won't
install. Packages requiring it should not install either, which may not
always be the case now. (This should be verified - for backports and
updates.)
><i> --
</I>><i> Sander
</I>><i>
</I>><i>
</I>--
André
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="016316.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="016320.html">[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#16319">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#16319">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#16319">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#16319">[ 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>
|
