On 12/3/2014 6:39 PM, Noel Butler wrote:
On 03/12/2014 21:57, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Sure, if that was truly the case nor would I, but if you are running
that old perl, there is plenty of stuff thats outdated, and not all
of the goodness gets backports, not just with perl, but with most
other things.
I can't fight every windmill and changing how distros work re:
versions of perl is one I choose not to battle.
Regards,
KAM
Oh absolutely! But why is it SA's problem? Or for that mater, any
up-stream's problem if distro X wants to only maintain
version_released_in_BC or some such, I mean if, and lets take Redhat
for example (not singling RH out, because debian are just as bad, if
not worse), they turn around and decide that RHEL since v5 will now be
supported for 10 years, not 5, at what point do you draw the line and
say " well RH that's your problem "
I try to avoid the "that's your problem" discussions as much as possible
because, for example, I could make the same argument about supporting
3.3.2 or go further and provide rules at all for the software.
So I take the maintain status quo approach as long as the code continues
to move forward and we don't spend too many cycles having to work around
legacy issues.
regards,
KAM
