Fedora products, to upgrade rather than backport?

[Matt Nuzum]

On 5/15/06, Eric Rostetter <rostetter at mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> Quoting Jesse Keating <jkeating at j2solutions.net>:
> > If we want to be
> > transparent to end users we should follow what "upstream" does.
>
> Depends on what transparent means.  If you want to be transparent in the
> sense of not breaking people's working machines, then no, you should backport.
>
> If you want to be transparent in the the sense of keeping with FC practices,
> then yes, you should upgrade instead of backporting.
>
> > Flames?  Thoughts?
>
> No flames, only thoughts, and not very deep thoughts at that.

Also not a flame...

I've done this on some occassions in order to get up-to-date software
onto my RH7.3 boxes and have found that dependency problems can make
this *very* difficult.

How concerned are you about this? My stuff is pretty application
specific so inter-dependcy problems are minimal, but what about things
like db3 or gd that are used across a lot of different packages?

-- 
Matthew Nuzum <matt at followers.net>
www.followers.net - Makers of "Elite Content Management System"
View samples of Elite CMS in action by visiting
http://www.followers.net/portfolio/