Le samedi 16 juillet 2011 12:20:22, Michael Scherer a écrit : > Le samedi 16 juillet 2011 à 11:36 +0200, Samuel Verschelde a écrit : > > Le samedi 16 juillet 2011 03:02:21, Michael Scherer a écrit : > > > Wasn't it against the policy ( ie, this is neither a bugfix, this is a > > > version update, providing feature ) ? > > > > Strictly speaking, maybe, but the policy says "Things are not set in > > stone, but we need a policy to move ahead with releasing updates for > > mga1, and we can refine the process as we find issues/shortcomings.", > > and I think this is one of the cases where we can allow updates, to ease > > packager's work. We could add "updates of mageia distribution building > > tools are allowed to ensure that packagers using stable releases have > > the same tools than those using cauldron" > > Personally, I would prefer that we first refine the policy and then act > rather than the contrary :) >
Indeed :) > And so, if we provides newer version of tools, what is wrong with using > backports for that ? > > I am not keen on pushing our newer tool on update, since we plan to have > our server using mageia, and so in the futur, if we push newer iurt, > mgarepo, rpmlint, they may potentially disrupt build system. So by being > clear and using backports, we would avoid such problem more easily. Except if you plan to use those newer version on the build system, in which case sending to updates_testing to have them well tested then pushed to updates would avoid having to install backports on the BS ? Samuel