Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Fernando de Oliveira wrote: Em 20-02-2014 23:00, LFS Trac escreveu: #3505: linux-3.13.4 --+ Reporter: bdubbs@… | Owner: lfs-book@… Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal| Milestone: 7.5 Component: Book

Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Armin K.
On 02/21/2014 03:51 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Fernando de Oliveira wrote: Em 20-02-2014 23:00, LFS Trac escreveu: #3505: linux-3.13.4 --+ Reporter: bdubbs@… | Owner: lfs-book@… Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal

Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Armin K.
On 02/21/2014 05:29 PM, Armin K. wrote: On 02/21/2014 03:51 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Fernando de Oliveira wrote: Em 20-02-2014 23:00, LFS Trac escreveu: #3505: linux-3.13.4 --+ Reporter: bdubbs@… | Owner: lfs-book@… Type: task

Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Armin K. wrote: We can do this for 7.5. The rule here is that we can update point versions but not major or minor versions. Couldn't it be the same for blfs, for almost all packages? That's worthy of discussion. Perhaps end packages and not libraries would be amenable to this type

Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Armin K.
On 02/21/2014 05:44 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Armin K. wrote: We can do this for 7.5. The rule here is that we can update point versions but not major or minor versions. Couldn't it be the same for blfs, for almost all packages? That's worthy of discussion. Perhaps end packages and

Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Bruce Dubbs wrote: Armin K. wrote: We can do this for 7.5. The rule here is that we can update point versions but not major or minor versions. Couldn't it be the same for blfs, for almost all packages? That's worthy of discussion. Perhaps end packages and not libraries would be

Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Armin K. wrote: I believe we need a policy to exactly define what exactly package freeze means. It means don't upgrade a package unless we talk it over and agree that it can be upgraded without creating additional work during the release testing period. -- Bruce --

Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Armin K.
On 02/21/2014 06:05 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Armin K. wrote: I believe we need a policy to exactly define what exactly package freeze means. It means don't upgrade a package unless we talk it over and agree that it can be upgraded without creating additional work during the release

Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Armin K.
On 02/21/2014 06:02 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Bruce Dubbs wrote: Armin K. wrote: We can do this for 7.5. The rule here is that we can update point versions but not major or minor versions. Couldn't it be the same for blfs, for almost all packages? That's worthy of discussion. Perhaps

Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Ken Moffat
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 08:51:55AM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Fernando de Oliveira wrote: Em 20-02-2014 23:00, LFS Trac escreveu: #3505: linux-3.13.4 --+ Reporter: bdubbs@… | Owner: lfs-book@… Type: task | Status: new

Re: [blfs-dev] Couldn't it be the same for blfs? [Was: ... #3505: linux-3.13.4]

2014-02-21 Thread Armin K.
On 02/21/2014 10:12 PM, Ken Moffat wrote: On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 08:51:55AM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Fernando de Oliveira wrote: Em 20-02-2014 23:00, LFS Trac escreveu: #3505: linux-3.13.4 --+ Reporter: bdubbs@… | Owner: lfs-book@…