Le dimanche 26 juin 2011 à 18:00 +0300, Anssi Hannula a écrit : > On 26.06.2011 01:34, Michael Scherer wrote: > > Le vendredi 24 juin 2011 à 17:33 +0300, Anssi Hannula a écrit : > >> On 24.06.2011 03:10, Michael Scherer wrote: > >>> Another rule that we could add is that cauldron should always be newer > >>> than backports, in order to ensure upgradability. The same goes for n-2 > >>> and n-1 release. > >>> While this seems innocent, do not forget this will have a impact when we > >>> do the version freeze. > >> > >> So this will prevent backporting anything to mga1 if it is not in mga2 > >> release/updates ? > > > > That's a good question but yes, I would consider such policy. > > Ie, do backport only for the latest supported release. > > This will essentially prevent backporting anything to mga1 after mga2 > release. :/
Yes, that's explicitly the problem. Now, maybe we could say "if you use backports on version N after the release of N+1, then mgaonline will no longer work". Provided we find a user friendly way to warn users, we can maybe find something. But again, it is either the backports or the upgrade. And people do have expressed to have both : - "reinstalling at every release is hard and annoying, why not do like Ubuntu and Debian ?" - "We want newer software, why not provides newer version ?" So we either need a way to solve the dilemma, or at least, a way to clearly explain the impact to people. I think I may have a idea that would solve this issue and the one of update, but I need to think a little bit before proposing it ( especially since I suffer from common cold, maybe my idea is completely rubbish ). -- Michael Scherer