From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Received: by 10.140.234.150 with SMTP id f144mr16293128qhc.9.1428363185009; Mon, 06 Apr 2015 16:33:05 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: voidlinux@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.182.78.105 with SMTP id a9ls912104obx.90.gmail; Mon, 06 Apr 2015 16:33:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.182.58.67 with SMTP id o3mr21024365obq.43.1428363184804; Mon, 06 Apr 2015 16:33:04 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-f176.google.com (mail-ob0-f176.google.com. [209.85.214.176]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d4si523540igl.1.2015.04.06.16.33.03 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 06 Apr 2015 16:33:03 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: none (google.com: t...@rubyists.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=209.85.214.176; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=none (google.com: t...@rubyists.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=t...@rubyists.com Received: by mail-ob0-f176.google.com with SMTP id fy7so64404715obb.2 for ; Mon, 06 Apr 2015 16:33:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk3np50zE6DCysQ/kiXeGJ/Y6vyAMJPtnmYrs1jvwCSS2yverCFhMRK//W0xUR2gdSixg/0 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.132.33 with SMTP id or1mr21914059oeb.82.1428363183551; Mon, 06 Apr 2015 16:33:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.104.8 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 16:33:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 18:33:03 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Void-Stable? From: bougyman To: voidlinux@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b41ce5a2aadaf051316b807 --047d7b41ce5a2aadaf051316b807 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I would also get output of 'these packages have security updates' in the timeframe. bougy On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 6:16 PM, bougyman wrote: > > With the existence of the void daily package archive, I've been bouncing > around an idea about how someone (some admin/architect/enterprise) could > maintain > their own 'stable' release cycle of void. If upon initial configuration > the repos are set to an archive with a date stamp, and the user has a way > to validate that moving > from that datestamp to ### future datestamp doesn't (potentially) break > any functionality, they can safely choose an upgrade path. for instance. > > I install on 2015-03-26 and lock the repository to the archive snapshot of > that date > > on 2015-04-26 I run *magic-command* and ask if upgrading to current > (2015-04-26) would (potentially) break any installed packages. > > I get output about any important breaking changes (to xbps, etc) which may > require an 'upgrade this first' action or 'remove these' actions. > I get output that may just say: 'Upgrade to 2015-04-01 first, then to > 2015-04-15, then 2015-04-26' (or does this automagically?) > > Thoughts? > > bougy > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "voidlinux" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to voidlinux+...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to void...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/voidlinux/fb1ba803-267c-43eb-8805-88600b5d19a5%40googlegroups.com > > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > --047d7b41ce5a2aadaf051316b807 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I would also get output of 'these packages have securi= ty updates' in the timeframe.

bougy

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at= 6:16 PM, bougyman <boug...@rubyists.com> wrote:

=C2=A0 With the existen= ce of the void daily package archive, I've been bouncing around an idea= about how someone (some admin/architect/enterprise) could maintain
their own 'stable' release cycle of void. If upon initial config= uration the repos are set to an archive with a date stamp, and the user has= a way to validate that moving
from that datestamp to ### future = datestamp doesn't (potentially) break any functionality, they can safel= y choose an upgrade path. for instance.

I install = on 2015-03-26 and lock the repository to the archive snapshot of that date<= /div>

on 2015-04-26 I run *magic-command* and ask if upg= rading to current (2015-04-26) would (potentially) break any installed pack= ages.

I get output about any important breaking ch= anges (to xbps, etc) which may require an 'upgrade this first' acti= on or 'remove these' actions.
I get output that may just = say: 'Upgrade to 2015-04-01 first, then to 2015-04-15, then 2015-04-26&= #39; (or does this automagically?)

Thoughts?
=

bougy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;voidlinux" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to voidlinux+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to void...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://gro= ups.google.com/d/msgid/voidlinux/fb1ba803-267c-43eb-8805-88600b5d19a5%40goo= glegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--047d7b41ce5a2aadaf051316b807--