Re: iproute package update policy

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

 



On 2016-03-14 21:42, Phil Sutter wrote:

...


So I will stick to my former plan of not rebasing iproute in stable
releases (unless there's good reason) but become open for feature
requests if there is valid need for it, a backport is feasible and it
doesn't interfere with core functionality. ACK?

Or both (at the price of additional cycles) - in addition to rebase-on-release for the main collection, (might be even without the selective post-release feature back-porting part), a semi-official COPR [1] repo in sync with the current kernel, to be available (for instance) to the dedicated sysadmins, who support bigger Fedora environments, like these in some universities.

I think that recently more and more maintainers of key packages in Fedora also start to follow this (Main-conservative + COPR-latest) delivery scheme in favor of their users/testers with special interests.

Kind Regards,
Alek

[1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/psutter/iproute/
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[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