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

Re: Fedora products, to upgrade rather than backport?

On Mon, 2006-05-15 at 16:14 -0400, Marc Deslauriers wrote:
> Every time we've decided to upgrade a package instead of backporting
> security fixes, we've broken other stuff and have had to work twice as
> hard to get things back into working order.
> I don't think we have the resources to upgrade packages. Backporting is
> a lot less work... 

Odd, it would seem the opposite in most occasions to me.  We've broken
stuff on RHL releases sure, and even maybe FC1/2, but what about 3, and
coming 4, and such?  If we were better at checking broken deps and
whatnot, would it not be easier to bump package A, respin B and C if
necessary, then beating head on desk for a good long time trying to work
out a backport when there is no backport available (like when our
package version doesn't match any of the close RHELs to steal from?)

Jesse Keating RHCE      (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team      (www.fedoralegacy.org)
GPG Public Key          (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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