[DRBD-user] URGENT Request for DRBD Developers
mailing-lists at hughesjr.com
Mon Jun 2 18:43:06 CEST 2008
Art Age Software wrote:
> I'm curious. How much work would it be to continue supporting the 8.0
> branch in Extras? It looks like you created a new name for 8.2
> (drbd82), so that allows users to mask out one version or the other to
> prevent update conflicts, right?
> Several people on the list have chimed in with how trivial it is to
> build from the rpms. If that is true, and there is no issue with
> conflicts (several earlier 8.0 releases remain in Extras now), then
> why not continue to support both?
> I'm not trying to be antagonistic here. I'm genuinely curious if this
> would add tons of work for you to keep both branches built and
> up-to-date. Or is this purely a philosophical issue? (BTW, I am
> actively considering making the move to 8.2. But I don't know whether
> it will be possible.)
OK ... I have decided that I WILL maintain the 8.0.x branch in centos-5
extras ... HOWEVER, I still recommend using the 8.2.x branch, and it
will still be set to obsolete the 8.0.x branch.
If people would RATHER use the 8.0.x branch, what they will need to do
is add the following lines to their yum.conf (or CentOS-Base.repo file
in /etc/yum.repos.d/ ... in that file, to the extras and centosplus repos):
If people take this step, then yum will work fine with drbd and ignore
drbd82. If you do not do that, then drbd82 will obsolete/replace drbd
I do this even though I don't think it is the best idea and by doing so
I commit myself to MORE work for the next seven years than maintaining
just one branch of DRBD for centos-5. Hopefully the people who will use
the 8.0.x branch are appreciative.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the drbd-user