Re: policy clarification/thing with libtalloc and rhel5.5
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 3:18 PM, seth vidal <skvidal(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
I talked with Stephen for a while this afternoon about the
libtalloc/samba3x thing and my goal was to come up with a solution that
would:
1. break the fewest people
2. require no acts of god to get something to change quickly mid-stream
in rhel5
So the solution to rebuild the special version of libtalloc 1.X that
samba3x requires as a temporary measure until rhel5.6 is released seems
like the best one.
I do not see a problem. +1 from me.
It has the following advantage:
- for people using samba3x AND having epel repos enabled - their
samba3x doesn't break
- it doesn't require any sort of magical powers to fix rhel for an
EXTREMELY commonly used repo in the middle of a release
- it means anyone who is already in the place where they have samba3x
installed and the libtalloc from epel they will be seamlessly upgraded
to a working version and not having things break when they DO start
using samba3x and they don't have to file a bug, have it closed as a
dupe and chase down the solution to nuke the newer one and issue an
update
- at no point in time does an EPOCH have to be involved.
seriously - this should just happen - I understand it goes against
various rules except it does follow the spirit of the rules which is:
1. don't break rhel
2. don't break using rhel and epel
3. don't break users who are just trying to get through their day
yay for not breaking users.
-sv
_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
“The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance.”
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"We have a strategic plan. It's called doing things.""
— Herb Kelleher, founder Southwest Airlines