Please follow the KISS principle

[Jason]

On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 01:42:23AM -1000, Warren Togami wrote:
> Johnny Strom wrote:
> >>
> >>Regarding RH8, this is totally infeasible.  If the community demands 
> >>that RH8 is not upgraded, then I personally have zero reason to work 
> >>on this project.
> >
> >Perhaps it would be a good ide to relase bugfixed pakckages located
> >at a separate place (directory) from the primary security fixes then 
> >users can uppdate the bugfixed packages if they so need or want to.
> 
> I am trying to remember... I believe this means we would need to 
> maintain two separate sets of package management tools, as apt compiled 
> for rpm-4.1 and rpm-4.1.1 are different.  I could be wrong though.
> 
> I dislike the idea of splitting bugfix and security updates because it 
> would further add complexity to the client configuration, as well as add 
> more unnecessary work to the project.  If the concern is that we will go 
> wild with arbitrary bugfix packages, this is totally not the case. 
> Bugfixes will be very rare in Legacy, and only in cases where there is 
> no credible opposition.
> 
> (Actually, non-critical bugfixes will probably go into the "stable" 
> channel of fedora.us, which is not by default part of Legacy's default 
> channels.)
> 
> Regarding RPM specifically, it is a losing proposition to even suggest 
> using RH8 without an RPM upgrade.  And don't worry about the stability 
> of that RPM upgrade, as it is very well understood and tested for a very 
> great amount of time and analysis involved.  We at fedora.us have been 
> arguing about this all year now.  This is nothing new, like people here 
> seem to think it is.
> 
> Warren
> 

I agree with this stance, that in general we should avoid branching
packages.  As long as there is a consensus to implement a bugfix, I have
no problem with it going in.  If the end user entrusts us to backport 
security fixes, I imagine they'll trust us not to patch in unnecessary 
bugfixes.

-jason