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
|
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 10:58 AM, atilla ontas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tarakbumba@gmail.com">tarakbumba@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div><div class="h5">Hi. I'm following this threat from the very beginning. While reading,</div></div>
i feel i'm reading a Mandriva Cooker mailing list posts. As a<br>
community distro, why Mageia developers still think like a Mandriva<br>
employee? Why backports and why so many policies, like a commercial<br>
enterprise distro? I mean, Mageia do not have paid developers to work<br>
on packages all the time. Also Mageia do not have so many packagers<br>
like Fedora or Ubuntu, So, why make so many things so hard?<br>
<br>
As wobo mentioned, people like latest and greatest software. I think,<br>
except a few users will use unofficial 3rd party repos to get latest<br>
software. While i was maintaining MVT (Mandriva Turkiye) repository,<br>
our users asked for GNOME 2.32 while Mandriva have GNOME 2.30 on<br>
official release.<br>
<br>
Personally i always hate the backports structure and policy. It<br>
confuses minds. Why Mageia need a backports repo, i really do not<br>
understand. Stability and bug free releases are of course a must. But<br>
it needs developers dedicated to work, almost paid developers. If a<br>
software do not related with core system, like vlc, it should included<br>
updates repo. Let upstream fix bugs and security issues. If a packager<br>
catchs a bug he should send a patch to upstream and wait for a new<br>
release. Otherwise, it is not packaging it is coding, which many<br>
potential packgers will avoid to contribute.<br>
<br></blockquote><div> </div><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div>+1 I also see no usage of backports. I'm someone quite new to Mandriva/Mageia so I wouldn't know what backports are for (Ubuntu has nothing like this, Fedora too) so why backport?</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Look at Debian and Arch Linux who haven't any paid developers but<br>
community distros. Stable Debian releases provide software from a<br>
century ago for the sake of stability. Arch provides latest software<br>
including core system and occaionally have breakages. I think Mageia<br>
should be between two of them. Release latest software in updates for<br>
non core system and libs, keep core system stable. Remove this<br>
backports thingy.<br>
<br>
My 2 cents...<br>
</blockquote></div>This approach looks quite good, but the new software should be tested quite good so the system will not break. Sure core system won't break with this approach but what about the other software?<br>
<br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Mit freundlichen Grüßen<br><br>Greetings<br><br>Daniel Kreuter<br><br><br><br>
|
