Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

[Rahul Sundaram]

On 03/15/2010 10:37 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 03/15/2010 05:36 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
>   
>> Progressive and aggressive is all fine as part of development branches
>> as far as I am concerned.  Several other distributions take care of this
>> disjoint nature by splitting up the repository and having two different
>> update streams.  With a smaller amount of additional maintenance burden,
>> we can do this as well.
>>     
> Your claim is self-contradictory: Additional repos mean additional 
> maintenance burden and additional complexity.
>   
Err, where is the contradiction?  I did clear point out that there is a
additional maintenance burden involved in this but if there is a
necessity for faster updates, it will happen anyway and it already has
elsewhere for various reasons.

> Or did I read your request incorrectly and you are proposing to 
> reintroduce a Core+Extra's split?
>   

You did read it incorrectly.  Splitting up the update stream doesn't
involve going back to core+extras at all.   KDE has a additional repo
already in kde-redhat.sf.net where they have first builds before they
get into the official updates repo..  Accommodating such workflows
within the Fedora infrastructure would allow people who want to move a
newer KDE in older versions, the choice to do so more easily.

Rahul