On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:05:36AM +0400, Roman Bogorodskiy wrote: > This sounds reasonable to me. Should we also drop 'derives-from' from > the previous releases' entries? Hmm, git grep'ping, derives-from is used all over the place ;) One thing I don't know for sure is whether it should be used for major upgrades (RHEL 6 to RHEL 7, or Fedora 21 to 22). > Also, thinking about it, I'm not sure about one thing regarding > 'upgrades': FreeBSD supports multiple major versions in parallel. > > For example it could be this way: > > 10.3 -> 10.4 > | > 11.0 -> 11.1 -> ... -> 11.X > > So 10.4 will become a dead end because there'll be no entries that > refer it in <upgrades> (e.g. 11.X will refer 11.(X-1)). What's the right > way to handle that? I don't know how much it is documented that 11.0 upgrades 10.3 and not 10.4? Is it just this way because we added to the database first 10.3, then 11.0, and finally 10.4? Or are there stronger requirements? Most of the times, things are this way in the database because of the timing of additions, if 11.0 was added later than 10.4, 11.0 would be marked as upgrading 10.4 rather than 10.3. So it might make sense to update the 11.0 entry to refer to 10.4 if needed. However, I don't think a lot of things are looking into these upgrades/derives links. Maybe libosinfo follows them for device support( I always forget ;) And it probably does not matter too much to have dead ends. Christophe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
