Package update policy

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 07:01:46PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 03:12:08PM +0200, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
> >> - The update policy of packages in group 3 is fully up to the maintainer
> > 
> > IMHO, stable trees should never receive version rebases, particularly
> > important if other packages depend on them, so again bug fix only.
> 
> That's not going to work. For example, once KDE MinGW packages get packaged,
> we'll need to version-upgrade mingw32-kdewin32 for mingw32-kdelibs to stay
> in sync with the native kdelibs. There's no "no upgrades" policy for native
> packages and rightfully so, so I don't see why there should be one for
> cross-MinGW packages.

kdelibs falls under group 2, where I said the policy would be 100% match
of the native package. So if you decide to rebase native, the rebasing
mingw would follow too.  I know that there isn't a  'no rebase' policy
for native packages, but there is an unofficial "don't break other
packages" in the repo policy which effectively precludes rebases of 
libraries unless you work with an upstream which is careful to prevent
regressions. Since everything in mingw is a library intended to be used
by other packages, I still think that on balance we should avoid rebases
(unless matching native package rebases) to minimize risk of regresions
for people using mingw

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London   -o-   http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org  -o-  http://virt-manager.org  -o-  http://ovirt.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505  -o-  F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|