Fudcon EPEL discussion summary/report

Chris Adams cmadams at hiwaay.net
Tue Jan 22 16:10:24 UTC 2013

Once upon a time, Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com> said:
> b) Maintainers should try not to push incompatible upgrades, however
> if they feel that is the only way forward, they can. When doing so they
> must: 
> 1) announce their intention as much in advance as they know it to
> epel-announce, and their reasons for having to do this. 
> 2) announce again when the package is in epel-testing. 

How about a suggestion/recommendation (but _not_ requirement) that
maintainers try to time incompatible upgrades approximately with RHEL
point releases?  So if you are going to update mediawiki (without a
version in the package name) to a new version for EPEL 6, you try to do
it about the same time that Red Hat releases the next 6.x version.

Red Hat releases public betas, so we generally know an update is coming
(although not the exact timing); that would be the signal to "get your
incompat upgrades into epel-testing".

For older releases (RHEL 5.x at this point for example), Red Hat slows
down point releases, so waiting may not always be feasible for those.

I don't know about other admins, but I tend to pay more attention to
release notes and such around that time (I know I should pay more
attention all the time, but time is limited).

Chris Adams <cmadams at hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.

More information about the epel-devel-list mailing list