On 06.11.2007 01:57, Russell Harrison wrote:
On 11/5/07, Michael DeHaan <mdehaan(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> If this is based on it being a "testing" repo I am not sure that is
> right as different folks are using it in different ways, but then again,
> I'm not sure
> it actually matters that much either. What are the technical reasons
> for keeping it?
I can see the use case where a user is testing a fix for package foo
in updates-testing. As it turns out package foo only partially fixes
the problem. When the developer pushes out foo +1 to updates-testing
with what he believes is the true fix it turns out to break in the
user's environment for whatever reason. That user would most likely
like to revert to the original package foo he started with in
updates-testing because it is better than the one in stable for him.
If only one version of a package is in updates-testing at any one time
he wouldn't have that option.
I think we are discussing a hypothetic corner case here that IMHO likely
will happen very rarely and only affect a small number of users.
Its the same argument for keeping multiple versions in stable. Just
smaller number of users impacted.
It just so happens these are the
users that are most likely helping out the project.
The same reasons could be applied for rawhide. But for years (until we
got koji) the most important testers were not able to get yesterdays
package. Some people even argued that this is the better approach, as
users that way are forced to report bugs instead of going back as a
Anyway: currently in testing only one package is kept, as nobody yelled
in the days right after I announced that behavior change. Michael's mail
came right after I flipped the bits iirc. We can change it back -- but I
say we leave it as it is and see what happens.