<p dir="ltr"><br>
On Jan 23, 2014 1:12 PM, "Stephen Gallagher" <<a href="mailto:sgallagh@redhat.com">sgallagh@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>
> Hash: SHA1<br>
><br>
> On 01/23/2014 01:43 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:<br>
> > Christopher Meng wrote:<br>
> >> But you can do this on copr IMO. Also update-testing is not just<br>
> >> a place for updates to have a break, you can let it satisfy the<br>
> >> needs of testing for unstable.<br>
> ><br>
> > Well, that's kinda abusing updates-testing. IMHO, COPR is the much<br>
> > better option until you have something reasonably close to going<br>
> > stable.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> The other problem with using updates-testing in this way is that it<br>
> makes it more difficult if you have to deliver a real bug or security<br>
> fix to stable. Now you have to unpush your testing version, mangle<br>
> your git history, file a new update ...<br>
><br>
><br>
> I agree with Kevin that this is pretty much exactly what COPR is good<br>
> at (and what I'm using it for myself[1]).<br>
><br>
> 1) <a href="http://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/sgallagh/ReviewBoard2/">http://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/sgallagh/ReviewBoard2/</a><br>
><br>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
> Version: GnuPG v1<br>
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - <a href="http://www.enigmail.net/">http://www.enigmail.net/</a><br>
><br>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlLhd8QACgkQeiVVYja6o6N1WgCgqGU51RjTv4/uizYPOV5HSBhE<br>
> WFkAoLAl4Twg3iHIBgEx1O5++juLlaXH<br>
> =rNyt<br>
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
> --</p>
<p dir="ltr">Is there something inherent to COPRs that solves the problem of duplicate paths, ie /usr/bin/mercurial from two different sources?</p>
<p dir="ltr">If I missed something, a link with an appropriate measure of mocking would be welcome.</p>
<p dir="ltr">--Pete</p>