2011/6/10 Michael Scherer <[email protected]>: > > We have used backports in the past for that, and I see no reason to > change that. > > If the problem is that backports were too buggy in the past, then we > should fix backports process, not bypassing them. > > And if we start by pushing new version in update, people will soon > wonder why the new version of X is in updates, while the new version of > Y is not, just because we didn't have X in release and Y was there.
Problem I see: So far (in Mandriva), example: we have used 2010.0/main/backports to offer new versions of software which had an older version in 2010/main but the newer version in 2010.1/main, or as the name says: backporting a newer version of a software from the current release to a previous release, as often used for Firefox. For Mageia it means, /backports should hold backports of software which has an older version in 1/core but a newer version in cauldron. If we put new software (aka missing packages) in /backports and the user activates /backports he also runs the risk that existing packages of his stable installation will be replaced by real backports of newer versions, backported from Cauldron - which he may not want to do. I wonder why we do not put these "missing packages" in /testing and after a while in /core or /non-free or /tainted (wherever they belong). These packages are software which were supposed to be in /core or /non-free or /tainted, they were just forgotten|came too late|whatever for Mageia 1 release freeze. -- wobo
