On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 02:18:26PM +0200, Christopher Engelhard wrote: > One thing I forgot that makes things even worse: > > - upstream does not support updates across more than one major version, > so anybody who actually has the old v10 installed will have their > installation completely broken by ANY update at this point > - for the same reason, trying to limit major updates to whenever > CentOS/RHEL release a new version won't work either. > RHEL releases a minor version every six months. And as I remember, EPEL8 allows breaking upgrades at each new RHEL release. Thus technically, it's possible to rebase the package every year without getting into conflict with packaging guidelines. On the other hand, I'm not sure whether the users know it and expect it. > I think I'll retire and look into re-adding it via modularity. > You could package each new incompatible version into a separate module stream and keep maintaining only the latest one. This way the users could switch to the newer stream whenever they feel comfortable. If they slip switching to the latest stream, then can migrate any later by hopping through all the intermediary streams up to the latest one. That could be even automated by a script. There is a downside of the modules: There is no mechanism for tracking the latest stream automatically. DNF team is willing to implement the mechanism, but so far it's only a conception. It's also dubious whether the new mechanism would be ported back to RHEL 8. So far users have to switch the streams manually. -- Petr
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
