Dear Karanbir, >> if we have axiom, I believe it's still valid, that we are lim 100 pct >> binary compatible with upstream, patched perl package should be pushed >> out via centosplus. > > Thats a good point. however, couple of things to consider here: > > - were not pushing perl to everyone by putting it in fasttrack, people > need to opt into that repo manually. I guess this is the first time where CentOS fasttrack is faster then RH's. I agree with David that even ft should not differ from upstream in that way. > - This is essentially a bugfix, with low enough Release tag that the > next update from upstream will be > EVR > > - There is strong indication from upstream that they will push a version > of perl into 5.2, either as an update or into fastrack; and this is > likely to happen soon. > > - Putting these perl packages into centosplus also raises the issue of > how we would maintain perl in centosplus for the rest of the life of > centos4/5 ; And I dont really see enough reason to maintain perl there. > > The other, very real, option is to say : lets leave them in the -Testing > repo and just create enough info at the right places ( bugzilla.r.c > bugs.c.o, blog posts etc ) - on how users might get the packages from > the Testing repo. My pref is still to push via fasttrack though, given > the nature of the other packages that are also in the Testing repo. 'Testing' sounds great. I guess RH will push an bugfix release soon as this has now been discussed a lot in the public. Then the 'CentOS Fix' will be obsolete and may be removed from Testing. Best Regards Marcus