Re: Fedora "backports" repo? (Was Re: PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 09:58:53PM -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> 2010/9/20 MichaÅ Piotrowski <mkkp4x4@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> > 2010/9/21 Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> As the concept of using third party repositories (both as packagers and as
>> >> users) grows, this interdependence will grow.
>> >
>> > Ok, so maybe it's time to setup Fedora "backports" repo for these that
>> > wants new and shiny Firefox 4, PostgreSQL 9 or whatever with big
>> > number.
>>
>>
>> What exactly is the fear here with these updates? Are there many
>> desktop users who do NOT want the latest released Firefox? Are there
>> many people using Fedora as their OS for their database server?
>
> Maybe we should turn this around and ask why more people don't
> use Rawhide.

Well "use rawhide" for anything else than testing and/or developing
the new release just do not fly.

Some of the reasons I can think of:

1) To high rate of changes / breakage
2) No signed packages
3) Slower kernel
4) To much of "manual fixing" required
5) To many broken deps, which might prevent applying updates and security fixes
6) Some others that I can't think of right now might be a consequence
of the above or something else

So please stop proposing rawhide for productive systems (or even
database servers *shrug*).
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux