Re: iproute package update policy

[Xose Vazquez Perez]

Josh Boyer wrote:

>  There is no need to call this ridiculous or nonsense.  There have
> been
>  valid reasons brought up in this very thread for being somewhat
>  conservative.  Please refrain from using language that makes the
>  conversation negative. 
Please, stay on topic.

Could you please explain why the kernel is following a very aggressive
policy of being very close to upstream, and related kernel tools must
remain outdated ?

Thank you.

iproute package update policy

[Peter Robinson]

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:13 AM, Xose Vazquez Perez
<xose.vazquez(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> > There is no need to call this ridiculous or nonsense.  There have been
> > valid reasons brought up in this very thread for being somewhat
> > conservative.  Please refrain from using language that makes the
> > conversation negative.
>
>  Please, stay on topic. 
He is right on topic for calling you out for your language, it's not
appropriate if you wish to be listened to, there's other ways to get
your opinion across perfectly well.

iproute package update policy

[Andrew Clayton]

On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 12:38:09 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:

>  On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:13 AM, Xose Vazquez Perez
>  <xose.vazquez(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > Josh Boyer wrote:
>  >  
>  >> There is no need to call this ridiculous or nonsense.  There have
>  >> been valid reasons brought up in this very thread for being
>  >> somewhat conservative.  Please refrain from using language that
>  >> makes the conversation negative.  
>  >
>  > Please, stay on topic.  
>  
>  He is right on topic for calling you out for your language, it's not
>  appropriate if you wish to be listened to, there's other ways to get
>  your opinion across perfectly well. 
Regardless of the language used, he has a point. The gap on
Fedora 22 is even bigger with a 4.4 kernel and iproute 3.16

iproute package update policy

[James Hogarth]

On 25 Mar 2016 03:05, "Andrew Clayton" <andrew(a)digital-domain.net&gt; wrote:
>  On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 12:38:09 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
>  > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:13 AM, Xose Vazquez Perez
>  > <xose.vazquez(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > > Josh Boyer wrote:
>  > >
>  > >> There is no need to call this ridiculous or nonsense.  There have
>  > >> been valid reasons brought up in this very thread for being
>  > >> somewhat conservative.  Please refrain from using language that
>  > >> makes the conversation negative.
>  > >
>  > > Please, stay on topic.
>  >
>  > He is right on topic for calling you out for your language, it's not
>  > appropriate if you wish to be listened to, there's other ways to get
>  > your opinion across perfectly well.
>
>  Regardless of the language used, he has a point. The gap on
>  Fedora 22 is even bigger with a 4.4 kernel and iproute 3.16 
Indeed which is why since upstream takes pains to avoid breaking changes as
I stated early in the thread I'm of the opinion that rebasing when the
kernel does makes sense and under that consideration would still comply
with the spirit in the Fedora update guidelines.

I also think other tools like iptables, nftables, btrfs-progs, xfs-progs
and similar kernel linked tools should be updated when the kernel gets a
rebase mid release but that's a topic for another day ;)