Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] Let's make Source Mage not suck!

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: seth AT swoolley.homeip.net
  • To: "Andra?? 'ruskie' Levstik" <ruskie AT mages.ath.cx>
  • Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Let's make Source Mage not suck!
  • Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 01:42:30 -0800

On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 09:16:53AM +0100, "Andra?? 'ruskie' Levstik" wrote:
> On 6:52:49 2007-01-07 Alexander Tsamutali <astsmtl AT gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I think there is almost no point in 2 week release cycle.
> > Users want to install operating system, install stable software and
> > then they want to install only critical or security bugfixes (support).
> Which we provide them with.... What we don't support is constantly
> installing a newer version of our system...

You probably mean that we don't support iso-based upgrades. We support
in-situ upgrades the same as an iso-based binary distro would, but it's
more like a debian update than an iso-based update.

We don't support "upgrade installs" where the iso/installer does the
work because the package manager is strong enough to do it (unlike rpm).

We could always make cauldron handle upgrades, but it's almost
pointless since we already have a better system.

> It's meant to be installed one
> time only and then only updated. We still have people running systems as old
> as hmmm I think 4 years and the systems still work as they should.
>
> > After some time passes they want to upgrade operating system, and i
> > don't think they want to upgrade every 2 weeks, so support time should
> Who said they need to upgrade? We provide a mechanism to ONLY update for
> security fixes so there really isn't much to this. If they wish it so they
> can also update the rest but it can be limited to security only.

This isn't really supported. Yes, it is supported for
intra-stable-cycles, but outside of a stable cycle, we only support
security updates working on the current stable grimoire.

When a new stable grmimoire comes out all new security updates will be
in context with the new stable, when it's tested anyways. People are
free to continue managing a system that has really old basesystem, etc.,
but we can't claim it's tested when, for example, they need to update
sendmail and all the deps are different from how the sendmail patch or
update was tested.

> > be longer (at least 6 month, better more than a year). If we release
> > often, a lot of stable grimoires appears and we cannot provide support
> > over long period.
> The only thing here I think is that we should still provide an unversioned
> symlink to the latest stable tarball that way it's possible to keep up to
> date with stable releases without needing to switch them constantly.

We've always done this. I don't expect this to change.

Seth

>
> --
> Andra?? "ruskie" Levstik
> Source Mage GNU/Linux Games grimoire guru
> Geek/Hacker/Tinker
>
> Hacker FAQ: http://www.plethora.net/%7eseebs/faqs/hacker.html
> Be sure brain is in gear before engaging mouth.
>
> Key id = F4C1F89C
> Key fingerprint = 6FF2 8F20 4C9D DB36 B5B6 F134 884D 72CC F4C1 F89C
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page