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

Re: Why do we need FC version attached to the package name?

On Jun 22, 2009, at 18:32, Dave Jones <davej redhat com> wrote:

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 09:31:32AM +0200, Jesse Keating wrote:

On Jun 22, 2009, at 9:26, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram fedoraproject org>

On 06/22/2009 12:54 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:

Not possible while we allow people to keep making updates to the
releases.  Those updates quickly become version ( not just release
) higher than the static copies on the release medium and repos.

Is there any proposed solution to this problem? We can't just continue
to break upgrade paths and call it the way things are done.


If you have any ideas I'd like to hear them. A super epoch has already
been suggested but that just masks the problem and may cause unwanted
downgrades. Any solution either involves severly limiting what kind of
updates can be done or requiring network access during upgrades.

How about something in bodhi that checks you aren't introducing this
problem, forcing you to push a higher NVR package to $nextrelease first
before you can push it to updates?

Considering these updates are supposed to be for our 'stable' release,
having them be in $nextrelease first seems like a good idea anyway.

Doesn't actually help when upgrading from the static DVD or release repo. Updates to the new release have to be enabled at upgrade time for this to help.


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