Fedora "backports" repo? (Was Re: PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

Michael Schwendt mschwendt at gmail.com
Tue Sep 21 11:49:31 UTC 2010

On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 01:51:03 +0200, Michał wrote:

> Setting up "official" backport repo will avoid repos fragmentation.
> Keeping all cool updates in one place appears to be a reasonable idea.
> Am I right?

Wait a minute! You need to define "fragmentation" here. It seems you refer
to the geographical location of repos only. More important is the
fragmentation caused by increasing the number of repos, especially if they
create additional targets to build for. Considering how APIs/ABIs and
stable packages are broken regularly, I don't think Fedora Packagers
could handle the increased maintenance requirements added by a backports
repo. Whether "official" or not, just imagine what can happen
if repo 1 upgrades repo 2, or vice versa, and unexpectedly. Better
attempt at making the current dist release usable/deployable in
production environments, and encourage more users to take a look at
Rawhide and Alpha/Beta releases earlier.

More information about the devel mailing list