Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)
 

2010/9/21 Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@gmail.com>:
> As the concept of using third party repositories (both as packagers and as
> users) grows, this interdependence will grow.

Ok, so maybe it's time to setup Fedora "backports" repo for these that
wants new and shiny Firefox 4, PostgreSQL 9 or whatever with big
number.

I'm not a huge fan of huge updates in "stable" Firefox3->Firefox4,
Kde4.5->Kde4.6 etc. In fact I would prefer to avoid them. But
sometimes people want this latest and greatest, shiny :)

Setting up "official" backport repo will avoid repos fragmentation.
Keeping all cool updates in one place appears to be a reasonable idea.
Am I right?

Regards,
Michal
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)
 

2010/9/20 Michał Piotrowski <mkkp4x4@gmail.com>:
> Setting up "official" backport repo will avoid repos fragmentation.

Another repository/branch inside Fedora infrastructure does not
automatically avoid the any of the potential problems that you would
want to lump into "repo fragmentation." You'd have to take great care
in crafting packing policy to prevent any repository interaction
problems concerning dependency chains, conflicts,obsoletes, parallel
installation, upgrade paths, etc.

> Keeping all cool updates in one place appears to be a reasonable idea.
Define cool. Does this mean that uncool updates would be excluded as
a matter of policy?
I'm not sure we all live in a world where a PostgreSQL 9 backport is _cool_.

-jef
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel