Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 03:44:51PM -0800, Mark Logan wrote: > >> Sebastien Roy wrote: >> >>> You probably want something other than Volatile if this is meant to be >>> used programatically by other software subsystems. >>> >>> >> I see your point, but isn't the rule 3rd party source == volatile? >> > > Not really. Some FOSS is Volatile, some is Committed. It all depends > on how volatile the FOSS's interfaces are, how frequent their major > releases, and how willing you are to deal with shipping and supporting > multiple versions should you go with something better than Volatile and > should the upstream community make a backwards-incompatible release that > we need to update to. > > If parted is for interactive use, then Volatile will do. If it's for > scripting, then Volatile is annoying, and if parted is truly valuable > then we can add value by going with Uncommitted. Your call. > > Nico >
Thanks for the clarification. I will change it to Uncommitted. Mark
