[indiana-discuss] Re: 3.1) Installation

[Alberto Ruiz]

2007/6/13, Daniel Griffith <mechadaniel at googlemail.com>:
>
> On 6/13/07, Glynn Foster <Glynn.Foster at sun.com> wrote:
>
> > "It should not be expected to support an upgrade skipping releases
> > eg. A -> B -> C is supported, A -> C is not supported without an
> > upgrade to B first."
> >


Would you expect sysadmins to upgrade their systems each 6 months? Not a
good idea. I've had problems in debian because of this with systems that
have 1.5 (aprox) years maintenance cylces.

> and in the end I was convinced that should be removed, especially since I
> > believe Solaris supports upgrades from at least 2 releases behind. But
> the fact
> > remains, what is the user expectation vs the potential for supporting
> that
> > expectation?
>
> I would say that someone _would_ have that expectation from a modern
> distribution.


Indeed.
-- 
Un saludo,
Alberto Ruiz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://oss-beta1.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/attachments/20070613/24e107dd/attachment-0002.html