On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 01:42:23AM -1000, Warren Togami wrote: > Johnny Strom wrote: > >> > >>Regarding RH8, this is totally infeasible. If the community demands > >>that RH8 is not upgraded, then I personally have zero reason to work > >>on this project. > > > >Perhaps it would be a good ide to relase bugfixed pakckages located > >at a separate place (directory) from the primary security fixes then > >users can uppdate the bugfixed packages if they so need or want to. > > I am trying to remember... I believe this means we would need to > maintain two separate sets of package management tools, as apt compiled > for rpm-4.1 and rpm-4.1.1 are different. I could be wrong though. > > I dislike the idea of splitting bugfix and security updates because it > would further add complexity to the client configuration, as well as add > more unnecessary work to the project. If the concern is that we will go > wild with arbitrary bugfix packages, this is totally not the case. > Bugfixes will be very rare in Legacy, and only in cases where there is > no credible opposition. > > (Actually, non-critical bugfixes will probably go into the "stable" > channel of fedora.us, which is not by default part of Legacy's default > channels.) > > Regarding RPM specifically, it is a losing proposition to even suggest > using RH8 without an RPM upgrade. And don't worry about the stability > of that RPM upgrade, as it is very well understood and tested for a very > great amount of time and analysis involved. We at fedora.us have been > arguing about this all year now. This is nothing new, like people here > seem to think it is. > > Warren > I agree with this stance, that in general we should avoid branching packages. As long as there is a consensus to implement a bugfix, I have no problem with it going in. If the end user entrusts us to backport security fixes, I imagine they'll trust us not to patch in unnecessary bugfixes. -jason
