[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)

[Samuel Verschelde]

Le vendredi 8 juin 2012 16:58:24, andre999 a écrit :
> Samuel Verschelde a écrit :
> > Le vendredi 8 juin 2012 16:11:07, andre999 a écrit :
> >> Sander Lepik a écrit :
> >>> 08.06.2012 11:38, Samuel Verschelde kirjutas:
> >>>> I re-read the backports policy, and there's a part I think needs to be
> >>>> pointed out before people start to backport packages.
> >>>> 
> >>>> "We need to ensure that upgrades never fail: cauldron must always have
> >>>> a higher version/release than in stable releases."
> >>>> 
> >>>> This statement is true, but implies more than what it says. It means
> >>>> that we can't backport a package for Mageia 1 with a higher version
> >>>> than what we have in Mageia 2 release (and updates?) media. And this,
> >>>> until we are able to take backports into account during upgrades.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Example :
> >>>> - Mageia 2 has wesnoth 1.10.2 in core/release
> >>>> - Mageia 1 can't get a higher version in its backports media
> >>>> 
> >>>> Do you all agree with my understanding of the policy ?
> >> 
> >> I see your point.
> >> In most cases, a backport for mga1 would be essentially identical for
> >> mga2 (except package file name and corresponding changes in the spec
> >> file). It would only differ if dependancies differ, which I suspect is
> >> unlikely for wesnoth or most other games, for example.
> >> So this means that for a backport to mga1, we should first do one to
> >> mga2. This would more than likely be done at the same time by the same
> >> packager, so not much more work.
> >> The demand for backports to mga1 is not likely to be very high, and
> >> would depend on a willing packager.
> > 
> > I think you missed my point. If Mageia 1 "backports" has higher versions
> > than Mageia 2 "release" (not backports), upgrade can fail because
> > currently our tools do not take backports from the target release
> > (mageia 2) into account when upgrading a distro.
> > 
> > Samuel
> 
> But wouldn't current tools update backports if backports are active ?

No, they wouldn't :)