On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 00:36 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote: > Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > Matt Domsch wrote a whole set of infrastructure tools for Fedora to > > push out updates to mirrors. I think it is what causes the > > fedora-enchilada to show up on various mirrors these days. > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Mirroring > > > > we dont need anything of this nature, we have something in place that seems to > be working mostly. What I meant by mirror management is how the stuff looks when > its on the mirror > > pushing out each tree, as it is, for upto 3 sub-release deep is just plain > stupid. Don't pull any punches now. :-) Seems it could get to more than 3 sub-releases, unless the upstream policy is to limit it to the last 3. Witness 3.9 and 4.5. > So if anyone has ideas on how we can do this in a sane manner, please do > speak up :) 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? 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. So, am I sane? Phil