On Wed, 19 May 2004 12:49:42 -0500, Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Isn't fedora's policy now, in general, to *not* backport fixes, but to > upgrade to the latest upstream version? what does "in general" really mean? It certaintly doesn't mean garunteed, absolutely not going to need to do backports. Do the right thing for the right reasons for the right package. I'm sure upstream latest versions of applications will be very common. I'm not so certain that upstream latest versions will always be appropriate for the library level nor the kernel itself. The point is any naming policy must be flexible enough to ensure that backporting fixes and building patched errata still has a place to work smoothly, especially because anything important enough to require a backport over a latest version push is going to be VERY important and need to update smoothly since these sorts of things tend to be security related. Building a naming policy that makes trivial feature updates work with mindnumbing automated ease...but makes critically important security backported package updates a pain in the ass to install...is short sighted. -jef
