On 12 Dec 2013, at 2:40 pm, Digimer <lists@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/12/13 06:36, Christopher Meng wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I wonder if there are some reasonable explanations of package >> "pacemaker" in the repo. >> >> I checked the package and the result returned is: >> >> Fedora: pacemaker-1.1.9-3.fc20 in rawhide. >> >> RHEL: pacemaker-1.1.10-14.el6. >> >> The latest version is 1.1.11RC1(1.1.10 Final stable). >> >> Why is the package in Fedora behind the one in RHEL in spite of the >> maintainer of these two are the same people? >> >> Thanks. >> -- >> >> Yours sincerely, >> Christopher Meng > > Hi Christopher, > > I can't speak authoritatively, but I am willing to bet it's a couple > of things. There was a huge push to get 1.1.10 ready for rhel 6.5, there > has been a lot of work on 1.1.11 and Andrew's wife just gave birth, so > he's on vacation for a bit. I would guess that pacemaker on fedora just > didn't get to the front of the burner yet. At the point it got to the front burner there were some known problems with 1.1.10 that I didn't want to push into fedora. As soon as .11 is released (any day now), I'll be pushing it into Fedora.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
