[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: "newer packages"



On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 12:28:35PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> Should we have a stronger effort to replace older RHEL packages if we
> put them in their own namespace and don't conflict?
> 
> This is sort of a nuanced problem since RHEL5 doesn't feel nearly as
> old as RHEL4 did at this point in it's release cycle.  But still,
> people do want newer versions of these packages.

I'd be in favor of something like this... would the separate namespace
by enough separation, or should there be an actual additional repo for
packages like this?

Prior would obviously be simpler.

Something like this for mutt (mutt15 perhaps) would be great.

Ray


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]