[libvirt PATCH] docs: Clarify our stance on backported packages

Andrea Bolognani posted 1 patch 2 years, 2 months ago
Test syntax-check failed
Patches applied successfully (tree, apply log)
git fetch https://github.com/patchew-project/libvirt tags/patchew/20220210141501.123285-1-abologna@redhat.com
docs/platforms.rst | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
[libvirt PATCH] docs: Clarify our stance on backported packages
Posted by Andrea Bolognani 2 years, 2 months ago
The repositories containing them are usually offered with lower
guarantees, so we don't consider them when it comes to figuring
out the minimum targeted version of our dependencies.

Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com>
---
 docs/platforms.rst | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/platforms.rst b/docs/platforms.rst
index 8c281afebd..90f14b02e8 100644
--- a/docs/platforms.rst
+++ b/docs/platforms.rst
@@ -42,8 +42,10 @@ The project aims to support the most recent major version at all times. Support
 for the previous major version will be dropped 2 years after the new major
 version is released or when the vendor itself drops support, whichever comes
 first. In this context, third-party efforts to extend the lifetime of a distro
-are not considered, even when they are endorsed by the vendor (eg. Debian LTS).
-Within each major release, only the most recent minor release is considered.
+are not considered, even when they are endorsed by the vendor (e.g. Debian
+LTS); the same is true of repositories that contain packages backported from
+later releases (e.g. Debian backports). Within each major release, only the
+most recent minor release is considered.
 
 For the purposes of identifying supported software versions available on Linux,
 the project will look at CentOS, Debian, Fedora, openSUSE, RHEL, SLES and
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [libvirt PATCH] docs: Clarify our stance on backported packages
Posted by Daniel P. Berrangé 2 years, 2 months ago
On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 03:15:01PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> The repositories containing them are usually offered with lower
> guarantees, so we don't consider them when it comes to figuring
> out the minimum targeted version of our dependencies.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com>
> ---
>  docs/platforms.rst | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/docs/platforms.rst b/docs/platforms.rst
> index 8c281afebd..90f14b02e8 100644
> --- a/docs/platforms.rst
> +++ b/docs/platforms.rst
> @@ -42,8 +42,10 @@ The project aims to support the most recent major version at all times. Support
>  for the previous major version will be dropped 2 years after the new major
>  version is released or when the vendor itself drops support, whichever comes
>  first. In this context, third-party efforts to extend the lifetime of a distro
> -are not considered, even when they are endorsed by the vendor (eg. Debian LTS).
> -Within each major release, only the most recent minor release is considered.
> +are not considered, even when they are endorsed by the vendor (e.g. Debian
> +LTS); the same is true of repositories that contain packages backported from
> +later releases (e.g. Debian backports). Within each major release, only the
> +most recent minor release is considered.

Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>


Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|