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

Re: The updates firehose



On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 16:05:00 -0400,
  Jesse Keating <jkeating redhat com> wrote:
> Anybody else think we're issuing entirely /way/ too many updates?  We've had 
> 138 "stable" updates, and 177 current "testing" updates.  If all those were 
> to go stable, we're talking over 300 updates, in just over a week.
> 
> Seriously.  We're drowning our users in updates.  Are all of them really 
> necessary?  I feel like we've got this culture of update whatever/whenever 
> coming from Extras where it was just fire and forget.  While that might be 
> fun for the maintainer, is it fun for the user?  Is it fun for the user with 
> a slow connection?

I'd rather have the updates available as rpm's than have to switch to building
a package from source, if there is an update I want.

Is it possible to provide meta data to yum with some sort of indication
of what the update does. Maybe a choice from Security, Critical (e.g.
data loss) bug, Bug fix, New features. Then you could tell yum to only grab
security and critical bug fixes if you didn't want to download lots of
updates.


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