[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Why back-porting patches to stable instead of releasing a new package.

On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:08:30PM +0200, Frank Lenaerts wrote:
> As base is quite small, it could be released more frequently. The not
> base part could evolve independent from the base part.

Consider e.g. a g++ transition or a transition to a new version of perl: 
There is no simple way to combine parts that have finished the 
transition with parts that haven't started the transition.

> The not base part could be split further into parts. These parts could
> be things related to mailservers, things related to webservers,
> database servers, IDS, end-user workstations, ... Because each of
> these not base parts are smaller, they too can be released more
> frequently. 

This will result in a complete chaos.

E.g. how do you plan to ensure smooth upgrades from any combination of
parts to any other combination of parts?

> This would certainly mean lots of work, especially regarding handling
> bugs, upgrades, security fixes, ... (as each of the subprojects would
> have their own responsibility), but, complexity can only be resolved
> by other complexity.


If it's too complex, it's time to rethink and restructure the thing to 
make it simple enough.

> cu,



       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Reply to: