On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 13:49 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 01:51:03 +0200, MichaÅ wrote: > > > Setting up "official" backport repo will avoid repos fragmentation. > > Keeping all cool updates in one place appears to be a reasonable idea. > > Am I right? > > Wait a minute! You need to define "fragmentation" here. It seems you refer > to the geographical location of repos only. More important is the > fragmentation caused by increasing the number of repos, especially if they > create additional targets to build for. Considering how APIs/ABIs and > stable packages are broken regularly, I don't think Fedora Packagers > could handle the increased maintenance requirements added by a backports > repo. Whether "official" or not, just imagine what can happen > if repo 1 upgrades repo 2, or vice versa, and unexpectedly. Better > attempt at making the current dist release usable/deployable in > production environments, and encourage more users to take a look at > Rawhide and Alpha/Beta releases earlier. I think he meant the same thing as you. He wasn't using 'place' literally. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
