Re: Fedora products, to upgrade rather than backport?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On Mon, 2006-05-15 at 15:20 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> So in the RHL space, the choice was clear.  Backport whenever possible.
> However the Fedora landscape is different.  "Upstream" Core does not do
> backporting, they more often than not version upgrade to resolve
> security issues.  Why should Legacy be any different?  If we want to be
> transparent to end users we should follow what "upstream" does.

Every time we've decided to upgrade a package instead of backporting
security fixes, we've broken other stuff and have had to work twice as
hard to get things back into working order.

I don't think we have the resources to upgrade packages. Backporting is
a lot less work...


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part



[Fedora Development]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Legacy Announce]     [Fedora Config]     [PAM]     [Fedora General Discussion]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Gimp]     [Free Internet Dating]     [Yosemite Questions]

Powered by Linux