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

Re: Desktop Proposal

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:

> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 09:06 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >
> > Have FESCo look at requiring approval for major version updates in the
> > middle of a release or possibly banning them outright.  This also has a
> > side effect of fewer updates which many find desirable.  This may end up
> > working on the honor system but should be possible while not compromising
> > our first mission objective.
> >
> > This could also be coupled with the experimental repo mentioned above to
> > bring new packages to stable releases but only to those who accept the
> > potential consequences and have enabled such a repo.
> This is what updates-testing is for.  If it doesn't work in
> updates-testing, you can just drop it on the floor.  The problem is when
> it gets promoted from -testing to updates.  We do /not/ want a third
> repo here, that makes the logistics balloon out of control.

This is not what updates testing is for.  Stuff in updates testing for F11
is for packages that are, ultimately, destined for F-11.  The experimental
repo for F-11 would be for packages that are destined for F-12 if at all.

Additionally stuff "working" in testing and being pushed to stable is the
problem.  The firefox example is a good example of this as is the
thunderbird update mentioned on fedora-devel.  Thunderbird should never
have been pushed to F-11 under this proposal.  The new thunderbird would
be released and updated in the experimental repo.  The old thunderbird
would continue to get updates in F-11 proper.


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