'policy' for multiple versions of same software in EPEL

[Matthew Miller]

I didn't say everything attributed to me below. I don't necessarily
disagree or agree right now, just wanted to note that only the first line
("+1 in theory..." is actually my words.)


On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:03:33AM -0700, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Matthew Miller <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
> Date: Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 5:44 PM
> Subject: Re: 'policy' for multiple versions of same software in EPEL
> To: EPEL development disccusion <epel-devel-list at redhat.com>
> 
> 
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 01:08:01PM -0600, Ken Dreyer wrote:
> > Red Hat itself sometimes rebases software between minor point releases
> > (eg 6.0 to 6.1). Could we allow EPEL maintainers to push
> > "non-backwards-compatible updates" at specific dates that match RHEL's
> > minor point release schedule?
> 
> +1 in theory, modulo the realities of getting it working.
> 
> This becomes difficult in reality. Or at least was when RHEL would
> bump, but other EL variants hadn't updated yet.  I specifically
> remember this being a problem with libevent in the past.  Would EPEL
> allow breaking changes when RHEL moves or when other EL variants move?
>  Is there an open-window timeframe etc?
> 
> In general, I'm in favor of being able to update, as a volunteer
> maintaining anything for 10 years is pretty unreasonable, but
> expectations for the users need to be set accordingly.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Matthew Miller  ☁☁☁  Fedora Cloud Architect  ☁☁☁  <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> epel-devel-list mailing list
> epel-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
> 
> _______________________________________________
> epel-devel-list mailing list
> epel-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list

-- 
Matthew Miller  ☁☁☁  Fedora Cloud Architect  ☁☁☁  <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>