@Nigel: Ubuntu packaging needs some love, no ?, looks like the puppetlabs APT repo has no puppet packages, and the package from ubuntu's official repos is still at 2.6.1 ..
On Mar 26, 12:37 am, Nigel Kersten <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Todd Zullinger <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thomas S Hatch wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Ian Ward Comfort > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> For what it's worth, we finally took the 2.6.x plunge with the > > >> 2.6.6 packages in EPEL testing, and have had no problems with the > > >> upgrade. So consider this a +1 for promotion to stable. > > > Great to hear, thanks Ian. > > > > Yes, I have been running my deployment on 2.6 for a while without > > > incident, actually I have had far fewer problems running on 2.6 than > > > I ever did on 0.2.5. > > > > Why are distros dragging their feet on including puppet 2.6? > > > Well, I think we'd have regretted it if we'd have rushed 2.6.0 into > > Fedora and EPEL. A good number of bugs and regressions were squashed > > thanks to the testing and patches from all the good folks here. If we > > can update from 0.25.5 to 2.6.6 and make it smooth for the users who > > don't follow this list so closely, we'll earn some favor for future > > updates that may have a few incompatible changes. > > Distros tend to care about a consistent, stable experience. > > It takes time to guarantee that this is the case. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
