Fedora "backports" repo? (Was Re: PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)
brandon at pwnage.ca
Wed Sep 22 13:53:19 UTC 2010
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones at redhat.com> wrote:
> I should add that whether this testing happens in Koji or in AutoQA
> isn't material. AutoQA is probably better. *Provided* that if the
> basic sanity tests fail they must prevent the packages from going into
> the Rawhide compose.
> Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
> Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
> Fedora now supports 80 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
Having an rpm add a repo file doesn't automatically solve the problem
for 100% of the repos out there. That leaves delegates the repo work
to the package maintainer. All because we don't want to copy Ubuntu's
GOOD ideas, just their BAD ones (like stale software updates vision).
As I said I'm not a programmer or I would do this myself. I don't want
Fedora to keep being behind openSUSE. Worst case scenario we'll see a
fork over the updates vision.
More information about the devel