Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (1324 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-factory] Will we have additional repositories for Leap as we have currently?
On 10/19/2015 05:08 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 19 October 2015 at 23:03, Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
So, if your limiting your scope to just those sort of packages, you
just need to persuade the maintainers to push the changes as
maintenance updates..which should be easy to do, its less work for
them than building and maintaining whole new repos at least ;)

In that sense I guess you're right, but maintainers haven't been doing that.

Perhaps, as you say, they should just do that.

Last I knew, an update could only be pushed if there was an open
bugzilla it was addressing.

That is one reason I know I haven't pushed routine updates via the
update channel.

Please clarify what the desired maintainer behavior is when a new leaf
package release is available, but there are no reported bugs against
the old release.

I think your understanding of the situation is correct, our
maintenance workflow requires bugs to be reported - but if there are
no bug reported, then Claudios example doesn't fit ;)

Or to put it another, plain english way

Package Updates to fix reported bugs - OK for Leap

Package Updates 'just because its newer' - Tumbleweed

With those two (existing) options, I still don't see the need for
additional repos :)


Because not every one thinks that two sizes fit all use cases.

Anyway, the hole discussion is somewhat pointless. Those maintainers
that want to provide newer packages for Leap can do so by simply adding
Leap as a build target. Those that don't simply will not.

There are plenty of packages where it makes sense to have newer versions
on top of a stable base without having to live with a complete rolling
stack. I maintain a number of those and none of them have been submitted
to Leap by me nor do I have any intention to do so.

The two sizes fits all argument is simply not true, no matter how often
it gets repeated.

Later,
Robert

--
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei@xxxxxxxx
IRC: robjo

< Previous Next >