blob: 8b6981e389a5d9ede41a4d896a02383522ae93f5 (
plain)
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
|
<p>On Jun 8, 2012 2:33 PM, "Samuel Verschelde" <<a href="mailto:stormi@laposte.net">stormi@laposte.net</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Le vendredi 8 juin 2012 11:40:59, Sander Lepik a écrit :<br>
> > 08.06.2012 11:51, Samuel Verschelde kirjutas:<br>
> > > And what about security issues and bugs to those backports? It will use<br>
> > > more packager ressource to patch backports than to provide newer<br>
> > > versions, won't it?<br>
> ><br>
> > If there is security issue then you have to fix it on cauldron too (usually<br>
> > with new version, so you can backport it to stable version). At least<br>
> > before release. And after backports are closed you can upgrade to latest<br>
> > stable version (for example mga3) and get patched version this way. I<br>
> > don't see the problem here.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> So you mean that backports are supported for 9 months and then you have to<br>
> upgrade to the next Mageia if you want security fixes... That's not what I call<br>
> support :/ What about people who want not to upgrade their whole system to the<br>
> next Mageia and still get support for that backport they installed?<br>
I don't think that we need to support backports that much. It should be clear that backports might not get all security updates. We should guarantee that it's possible to upgrade to next stable release and that's about it. We really don't have resources for more.<br>
And if user doesn't want to upgrade to next release but at the same time wants security updates s/he can always downgrade.</p>
<p>--<br>
Sander<br>
</p>
|
