Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 12:19, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Actually I'd like to see this, too, but Fedora people seem to be so
unwilling to support something like that so I tried the "better ask for
something that's not that hard to realize and lies between the current
solution and the best/ideal solution; maybe then the chances to get what
we ask for are higher and it make one big part of the problem go away,
even if parts of the problem remain"-approach
Well, we could do this, but it would involve an explosion of epochs :/ Our
ability to roll back package versions that were 'mistakes' is very very
useful. The only way to keep this is to use epochs to "force" a lower
version package to win. Once epoch, always epoch.
I would like to say that this is the only way that we can fix this
_today_. This is one of the areas where I would love to see some
changes in RPM. It's a constant source of pain for our developers and
by effect our users. (Add an Oops: tag that has a list of versions that
this package is _actually_ older than?) Just that thinking only of what
we can do today is not always the best way to think about the problem.
Luis has a point - let's apply some thinking about not only how we can
solve the problem today (or not) and figure out what changes we can make
to help it down the road.
--Chris
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list
fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
