Well, in many enterprise distro having different name and, possibly, no conflicting path for a complex package is a common option. In rhel5 for example exists samba package for samba 3.0.x and samba3x for samba 3.x , and samba it is often a critical package and the change between different versión are many and important. I believe that it is true also for puppet, and i think that should be a sysadmin's choice to upgrade to a new major version. And not everyone is so expert in dealing with yum repository, or apt fwiw.
Best 2012/10/7, Jakov Sosic <jso...@srce.hr>: > On 10/03/2012 08:38 PM, Aaron Russo wrote: > >> Personally, I would have liked to see a separate repo for each version >> of puppet (so that users of 2.6.x, 2.7.x and 3.0.x could continue to >> receive the latest and greatest for their version). But I also don't >> have to manage the thing, so I respect that it didn't turn out this >> way. However, I think the method of communicating to the community can >> be improved to compensate. > > Yeah, this would be the best solution, to have different repositories > for different subversions. > > I don't like the "naming" solution where puppet packages are named > puppet2 or puppet3... > > > -- > Jakov Sosic > www.srce.unizg.hr > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Puppet Users" group. > To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. > > -- Inviato dal mio dispositivo mobile -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
