Re: Redhat 8 to 9

[Eric Rostetter <rostetter mail utexas edu>]

Quoting Panu Matilainen <pmatilai welho com>:

> > Since the "official" advise on the FL web site is to use apt or yum, we
> > should make getting an apt/yum for each OS a high priority, IMHO.
>
> Indeed. I've been watching the FL apt package being stuck in QA for a
> long, long time for no particularly good reason and Jason has probably
> gotten totally fed up with the situation.

I QA'd the RH 8.0 apt twice, and had no major problems.  It was hung up
for some strange reasons (we don't want to release it now because we want
to improve it) which shouldn't hold it up IMHO (just publish an updated
version later instead).

> I personally dont unfortunately
> have time or resources to test and verify on old RHL versions, but as far
> as I can tell by just looking at the package in QA it's perfectly ready
> for publishing.

I've QA'd it, but to no avail.

> It might not be perfect but it still beats the hell out of
> telling people to use apt from freshrpms or so because all the other
> packagings of apt lack a significant amount of functionality compared to
> the fedora.us/fedoralegacy version.

I agree.

> Or to cut it short: publish the damn apt package in QA, there's nothing
> terribly wrong with it. You can always publish update to it later (news at
> eleven, bugs are found and new version gets released)

I Agree.  But I guess FL seems poised to kill RH 8.0 so it doesn't matter
for that one.  Unless we can change Jesse's mind on killing off RH 8.0.

> 	- Panu -

--
Eric Rostetter