On Tuesday 24 May 2005 18:10, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 02:57:59PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > > > What say you? > > > > That leads to releases being upgraded on previous OS releases. This is > > against the policy of Fedora Legacy, as it is no longer a backport. We > > need to avoid this as much as possible. > > To elaborate -- the concern is that this actually causes *more* work, > because upgrading packages can have all sorts of interactions and > consequences. Keeping the package versions the same means that less > extensive testing is required, and rarely if ever does changing one package > mean that some other package needs to be updated too. Also, changing package versions might cause that some applications certified for, say, RHL 7.3 will not work because of a library added/upgraded when, say, Gaim was changed to a new version. If you have a bunch of servers with an older RHL version, most probably is because you have applications that only run in such RHL version. Regards, Josep -- Josep L. Guallar-Esteve Eastern Radiologists, Inc. Systems and PACS Administration http://www.easternrad.com
Attachment:
pgpPo3tA4XZD6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
