On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Ray Van Dolson<[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 05:06:11PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: >> On Thu, 2 Jul 2009, Ray Van Dolson wrote: >> >> > On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 11:53:29PM +0200, Xavier Bachelot wrote: >> > > Mike McGrath wrote: >> > > > I've stayed on the nagios 2.x tree long enough, anyone opposed to me >> > > > updating to 3.1.2 in EPEL? >> > > > >> > > Last time this was discussed, the plan was to keep nagios at 2.x and >> > > introduce a parallel installable nagios3. iirc, there's no automagic way >> > > to go from a nagios 2.x to a nagios 3.x conf, so the update wouldn't be >> > > transparent. And a major version bump would be against the RHEL/EPEL >> > > policy anyway, unless special circumstances (security fix that cannot be >> > > backported...) >> > > >> > >> > If nagios3 is introduced, will the original nagios package be orphaned >> > or will Mike or someone else continue maintaining it? >> > >> >> I wouldn't be maintaining it. I'm not even sure if upstream is >> maintaining it anymore, it's been over a year since the last release and >> from their downloads page they seem to be steering people towards the 3.x >> tree. >> >> -Mike > > If it's dead upstream, seems like adequate "special circumstances" to > replace the older one. > > Although maybe it's "friendlier" to go the nagios3 route and then > retire nagios later once people have a chance to migrate?
Yes I think we should cover this int he next EPEL meeting. There are several apps which do not cleanly update (moin, nagios, some mediawiki). Coming up with a methodology for dealing with these properly would help other package people. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
