On 04/03/2018 03:11 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > Given the current status, I suggest you just ask FESCo to give you > permission to release 13.x without supporting upgrades from 10.x and > then submit a Magazine article explaining the situation once 13.x is > landing. I would support this option. It sounds very difficult to me to offer a way for users to hit all the versions along the way (we'd have to package all of them in parallel, the user would have to manually switch to each along the way and $do_stuff to upgrade to each point, the user would have to *know* they need to do that*, etc.). So out of a list of not-great options (burdensome upgrades, just skip to 13, or retire it) I think it's reasonable enough to just declare bankruptcy. One question comes to mind though - won't this be a problem in the future too? How can we guarantee that users can keep upgrading to 14, 15, 16, etc. since Fedora doesn't keep in-between updates in the repos? I.e., say Fedora 29 ships with nextcloud 14, and before Fedora 30 comes out say 15 and 16 are released. If we update F29 to 16, 15 will be lost with no upgrade path for the users. Perhaps this is why Stephen suggested using modules, so we could continue to offer the various streams. But there's still a communication problem - the user will have to know they need to do $special_things. Maybe that's just an upstream concern? * As an OwnCloud user I did not know I needed to upgrade incrementally and avoid skipping releases. If I didn't know that, it's probably safe to assume others don't know. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
