Daniel Veillard writes ("Re: xen-unstable => 3.2, binary packages"):
> 'Fedora Core' was renamed 'Fedora' between version 6 and 7, you
> will find the latests under the 'releases' subdir:
Ahh! Thanks.
> My own opinion about this is that since xen is packaged as part of
> Fedora, rebuilding a package on your side might be more of a problem
> than a solution (I mean for official release rather than for testing)
> since it's best to keep a coherency. If you have some problems with
> the packages as done in Fedora, it's better to get the issues (assuming
> any) solved, rather than putting a parallel set of packages, in the end
> avoiding users confusions helps everybody in my opinion.
Right, I can absolutely see where you're coming from and obviously I
would prefer to let Fedora developers do the work too :-).
The question is what users might be expected to do between the release
of Xen 3.2 and the time that Fedora releases its Xen 3.2 packages.
For most users of Xen it's a pretty critical and important package and
some kind of backport of Xen 3.2 onto their running system is likely
to be valuable to many. Xen users may often want to choose explicitly
to upgrade their Xen version.
I don't know what Fedora's policy is about including new upstream
versions in updates, but I would think that most sensible policies
would generally frown on pushing a new hypervisor into an
already-released distribution.
Ian.
--
Fedora-xen mailing list
Fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen
