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

Re: To update or not to update...



On 15.08.2007 19:32, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
> Hi all, so the (only) package I maintain, remind, has released a new
> version (from 3.0.24 to 3.1.0).  There are some new features and some
> bug fixes:
> 
>   http://www.bludgeon.org/~rayvd/WHATSNEW
> 
> However, per the update guidelines and policies, it doesn't appear to
> meet the criteria as an update that should be pushed (although maybe to
> the 5.1 and 4.6 releases) -- none of the bug fixes are "critical"
> really.

>From this description I'd say: don't update.

> That said, from observing the build reports, it seems as if a lot of
> people are pushing new upstream releases of their packages into the
> current version of EPEL (updates, not the new builds).  It doesn't seem
> that all of these updates are in harmony with the update policies.

I noticed that also and put a "poke those people and point them to the
EPEL update guidelines" on my todo-list.

The current behavior might be acceptable for the current phase where
EPEL is still young, but if people really want a repo that ships more
up2date packages I'd say we start EPEL-rolling in parallel with
EPEL-stable (e.g. a repo on top of epel-stable).

A repo where some packages stay stable while others are updated to the
latest and greatest is a mix that won't make people happy, as those that
are those that are interested in a "a stable base" and those that want
"latest and greatest" both don't get what they want.

IOW: we should pick a side (and we did), as something in between is bad.

> [...]

Cu
thl


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