* Buchan Milne (bgmi...@multilinks.com) wrote: > On Tuesday, 5 October 2010 23:39:09 Tux99 wrote: > > On Wed, 6 Oct 2010, nicolas vigier wrote: > > > 3) I mentioned earlier that the packager would need to use good > > judgement and not include major incompatible version changes > > You are aware that this is significantly more work than 'mdvsys submit -t > 2010.1 --define section=main/backports $package' (after some minimal testing > of > course)?
This part of the discuss let me think something. We have both some people wanting huge set of backport and other wanting long life release w/o change except security/bug fix. So, why not alternate both, 1 release with backports denied but long life, and the 2nd with backports and update but during a shorter period. (X.0 would be the new distro with backports, X.1 the one more servers oriented or enterprise). What do you think ? -- Olivier Thauvin CNRS - LATMOS ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖
pgpGxLnCAZWXM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
