[CentOS-devel] Release farkage potential

Karanbir Singh mail-lists at karan.org
Sat Sep 8 19:55:32 UTC 2007

Phil Schaffner wrote:
> Well, how about backing up to the basic assumptions before suggesting
> solutions.  Just because the upstream with their much greater (paid)
> resources seem to be going to a M.N release scheme, is CentOS
> constrained to follow precisely in their footsteps? 

maybe, or maybe not. the issue here is that if VAR Mr.$X only supports a product 
on 5.3.1 and CentOS does not provide that, there is a problem. The landscape is 
littered with people / vendors / support people only recommending people stick 
within a specific release Update version ( which might be one of the driving 
forces behind upstreams decision to create this sub-release thing in the first 
place ).

 > What's wrong with
> keeping the current scheme of following the latest release and
> continuing to have M as a pointer to the latest M.N tree?  If someone
> REALLY needs the minor release[es] with associated updates, they can go
> to the upstream for support; however, I suspect that would be a
> relatively rare case.  If the demand is there down the road, can always
> re-evaluate the policy.

ok, so for now - lets assume that we will not be doing the sub-release [1], then 
what can we do now to make sure that we provision in the ability to make this 
call at a later stage ?

[1] although, if it happens upstream there will be a lot of people asking for it 
within CentOS as well, and to be honest - as long as we can, we should.

Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219 at icq

More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list