> And I disagree with your disagreement ;-) ;-) > If you're still adding new packages to maintenance mode branches, what > makes them different from non-maintenance mode? Packagers who want to I am against a difference between maintenance and non maintenance branch, other than putting big warnings to packagers and users (to packagers "many users are likely willing to have only bugfixes, you may be using bandwidth and disk space for nothing" and to users "this is in maintenance mode, don't except new upgrades, although they may happen"). > build new stuff for maintenance branches should do it outside the Fedora > build infrastructure -- the whole point of maintenance mode is to reduce > the amount of infrastructure work needed to keep Fedora going to something > manageable with the amount of resources Fedora has. Not doing anything special for maintenance branches is the better way to reduce the amount of infrastructure work needed to keep Fedora going. I don't think the load on the buildsys is relevant here, at least it is not my impression. For the disk space and bandwidth I don't know. Doing that outside of the fedora infrastructure would in my opinion be a big loss, because the packagers that want to do it would have to reproduce the buildsys and it will be very costly for them, preventing them to work on other things. To put it otherwise, the marginal cost for fedora buildsys accepting builds for new packages for new branches is negligible, due to the tremendous amount of economies of scale associated with the functionning of the buildsys. > People who want new packages should upgrade. Maintenance mode is there > only as a security / bugfix only courtesy for those who can't upgrade. We Why? As long as it doesn't impact the common resources. > want to encourage upgrading as much as possible, however Why not let the users decide for themselves? -- Pat -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
