On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 17:33 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 1/28/06, Paul W. Frields <stickster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I wonder if whether, just as the idea of supplying a final yum update > > with configuration files pointing to the Legacy project repos was > > discussed, the same might be said about mock. This might aid > > maintainers who are willing to continue supporting packages for releases > > that have entered maintenance mode. > > If a "maintainer" can't figure out how to reconfigure mock to use a > legacy target... should i really be encouraging them to pick up the > burden of provided maintainence updates? If a "system administrator" can't figure out how to reconfigure yum to use Legacy depots for picking up security fixes... etc., etc....? It's not about encouraging ignorance, it was simply a chance to provide some QA through an existing, automated channel. After all, mock will have to provide new configuration information in the FC5 distro, so why not? (Well, okay, "will have to" is more like "probably should.") One person making the changes as opposed to thousands seems like a no-brainer to me. *shrug* -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
