Christian Lohmaier a écrit :
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Juan Luis Baptiste<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Christian Lohmaier
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Juan Luis Baptiste<[email protected]> wrote:
[..]
As I said, no one is talking about picking up a fix if there's a bug
fix only release, it's for when it isn't and we need to reduce the
chance of regressions by taking the modifications that *exactly* fix
that bug.
I strongly disagree. The policy is stating the exact opposite. And
also Michael seems to defend the policy as it is written, and not your
interpretation here.
No, I'm doing exactly as the policy says, patch current stable
version.
But then you're *not* doing as the policy says, as policy says:
"same version of the package *released with the distribution*"
So whatever version that ended up in the initial release of the
distro. Not what is available upstream.
To make things entirely clear, the agreed base policy (in various
meetings) was that updates should contain no new features. Thus in
general, a (verified) bug fix only release from upstream would qualify
as an update.
This being subject to exceptions, which were later agreed on after much
discussion.
Of course, to conform with our base policy of no new features in
updates, if an upstream release contains any new features (and doesn't
qualify for the exceptions), then bug fixes obviously have to be applied
in patches. (Which is probably why the editor of the wiki page erred.)
(Other factors, such as version number dependancies, would have to be
considered as well.)
In other respects, this page accords with agreed policy.
I don't really see the point of doing all this arguing about a wiki page
that doesn't completely accord with update policy. We just have to fix
the wiki page.
The thing about bugfix only releases is something that it
seems packagers have been doing implicitly as pterjan said before, and
needs to be added to the policy.
Yes, but this then changes the policy drastically (for the better, so
please change it)
It is not that drastic a change. The effect is essentially the same,
although it is of course much easier -- and generally safer -- to apply
a (verified) bug fix only release from upstream.
As stated above, and mentioned by others posting to this thread, the
wiki page does not accurately affect the policy. (It is focusing on a
means of complying with the policy, rather than the policy itself.)
And when I write "whatever is against the policy" - I'm referring to
what is written in the wiki, not what people actually do.
Policy is what was agreed on, and not any errors that may exist in what
is written in the wiki. We have corrected many similar errors in the wiki.
Calling your understanding of the policy "stupid" is not necessarily the
most diplomatic approach.
ciao
Christian
Regards
--
André
