Distributions going smart & bugfixes?

[Axel Thimm]

On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 10:00:09AM +0100, Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote:
>
>> OK, we (and with "we" I mean packagers for distributions) could very
>> well live with such a model - no (sub)minor releases, but a
>> semi-official branch to pull hot fixes from. I just don't want to see
>> Anders demotivated as w/o his collection of fixes in that branch
>> Fedora 10 users would still not be able to do much with smart and it
>> would lose some of its fan base.
>
> Most of the Fedora 10 issues were self-inflicted, by allowing
> strange packages (like opal) or allowing rpm dependency loops...
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/smart/+bug/302345
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/smart/+bug/302395

I agree about the opal issue, but I think rpm dependency loops are not
a bug per se, but AFAIK even a planned feature from the beginning. The
"loops" are considered to be packages that can only be installed
together.

> Some were just changes in the rpm or yum metadata "standards",
> where those differ significantly from the previous versions.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/smart/+bug/263762
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/smart/+bug/302453
>
>
> But yeah, it needs to be updated to keep up with things like
> Python upgrades, and "required" features like mirrors or comps.
>
> And that's even before going into the "desired" features like
> PackageKit integration or source package / build system support...

Oh, stop it - you're making me hungry for more :)

Thanks!!!
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.labix.org/pipermail/smart-labix.org/attachments/20090109/8415381d/attachment-0003.pgp>