[elrepo] NVIDIA short-lived versus long-lived branch

[Parsons, Aron]

I think the strategy outlined is sound, since as you stated, ELrepo is for Enterprise Linux and stability is paramount.  But other users shouldn't be deprived of the latest release if they want to test them before the next long-lived branch is released.

/aron
________________________________________
From: ELRepo Bug Tracker [bugtracker at elrepo.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2013 7:29 AM
To: Parsons, Aron
Subject: [channel: elrepo/el6 0000413]: add packages for current long-lived branch 319.60

A NOTE has been added to this issue.
======================================================================
http://elrepo.org/bugs/view.php?id=413
======================================================================
Reported By:                parsonsa
Assigned To:                pperry
======================================================================
Project:                    channel: elrepo/el6
Issue ID:                   413
Category:                   kmod-nvidia
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   feature
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     assigned
======================================================================
Date Submitted:             2013-10-04 15:26 MDT
Last Modified:              2013-10-05 05:28 MDT
======================================================================
Summary:                    add packages for current long-lived branch 319.60
Description:
The current NVIDIA long-lived branch is 319.xx.  This was never packaged in
elrepo, but it would be nice to have it available.  The last long-lived
branch in elrepo was 304.xx.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-amd64-319.60-driver.html
======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 (0003293) pperry (administrator) - 2013-10-04 16:25
 http://elrepo.org/bugs/view.php?id=413#c3293
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,

We already have 325.15 from the short lived branch, although I appreciate
the latest 319.60 release from the long lived branch is a "newer" release.
We did package the 319.xx series, but stopped at 319.32 when the 325.xx
series was released. If we released 319.60 now then technically yum would
see this as a downgrade.

Do you have a specific need for this release, for example to support
hardware not supported in 325.15?

Given the amount of time it takes to build each release I'm reluctant to
maintain both the short lived and long lived branches unless there is a
clear case to do so.

Perhaps we need to have a policy discussion around which branch we should
stick with? It does seem strange to me that NVIDIA are making releases to
the long lived branch adding support for new hardware that isn't supported
in the "later" versioned short lived branch.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 (0003294) parsonsa (reporter) - 2013-10-04 17:12
 http://elrepo.org/bugs/view.php?id=413#c3294
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My specific use case is that I don't necessarily want to always be on the
latest version from NVIDIA, but want to move from long-lived to long-lived.
 The kmod-nvidia-304xx is nice because I'm pretty well assured that my
clients won't be pulling the latest upstream release, but will stay on the
304 branch which should only receive bug fixes and not features.  But if I
go to just "kmod-nvidia", I'll be pulling the latest upstream whenever it's
packaged in elrepo.

The resolution I'm looking for is that a kmod-nvidia-319xx package could be
created to support the current long-lived branch.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 (0003295) pperry (administrator) - 2013-10-05 05:28
 http://elrepo.org/bugs/view.php?id=413#c3295
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OK, and I'm inclined to agree with you about the merits (stability) of the
long-lived branch given we are supporting Enterprise Linux and everything
that entails.

However, this is a bug reporting forum and I think we really need to have a
policy discussion around this, and I think the mailing list is a better
place to do that than here, so lets start a thread and discuss it there:

http://lists.elrepo.org/pipermail/elrepo/2013-October/001980.html

Issue History
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change
======================================================================
2013-10-04 15:26 parsonsa       New Issue
2013-10-04 15:26 parsonsa       Status                   new => assigned
2013-10-04 15:26 parsonsa       Assigned To               => pperry
2013-10-04 16:25 pperry         Note Added: 0003293
2013-10-04 17:12 parsonsa       Note Added: 0003294
2013-10-05 05:28 pperry         Note Added: 0003295
======================================================================