On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm not opposed to putting puppet 3 in, but it'd really be helpful if it > went in as "puppet3" or something, and left the stable version as is, > happily getting security-only updates. My biggest concern is that 2.6 will not get security updates for the lifetime of EPEL 5 and 6. To me it seems better to bite the bullet now, get version 3 into updates-testing, set the karma requirement very high just as the maintainers did for the 0.25 -> 2.6 transition. This is the main problem I see with parallel-installable packages, particularly in EPEL - it seems to give users an assumption that the old packages are fine. - Ken -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
