Am 26.01.2014 01:54, schrieb Chris Murphy: > On Jan 25, 2014, at 4:12 PM, Adam Williamson <awill...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> * Do an offline update that includes Foo v2.0 >> * Boot the updated system, run Foo, it migrates its configuration to >> some new scheme >> * Realize there was something wrong with the update, roll it back >> * Run Foo again, find it doesn't work because it's been migrated to the >> new config scheme which the old version of Foo doesn't work with > > I would grumble, but a configuration file being updated and made incompatible > with the prior version would be tolerated. Ideally the application makes an > unmodified copy. If it doesn't, new school restore with --reflink from > snapshot, regular cp if using LVM thinp snapshots, and old school just > restore the file from a conventional backup. Not such a big deal
the short version of ahwat you said could have been "forget snapshots at all to solve such problems" to not lead dvelopers into temptation of "i can be less caeful because we have snapshots" in other words: don't work around problems by create new ones
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
