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
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.
"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