I want to clarify interpretation of packages Backporting criteria documented in CONTRIBUTING file.
One of the (many) features of nixpkgs which got me interested was the policy for stable branches backports - the fact that there is no fear to backport packages bug fix releases. But the real world experience is not that straightforward. There where different opinions and two of such backporting PRs where rejected.
My view on backporting bug fix releases is following:
- Yes, there is always a chance that they will introduce new issues and it happens from time to time
- But they usually fix much more issues than they introduce
- I would very much prefer taking the risk and have version
X.Y.5with 50 bugs fixed + potentially very few new ones introduced, comparing to have
X.Y.0with 50 already known bugs.
- We can always roll back
What’s your opinion ?
This post was written with best intentions to clarify the process, I really don’t want to blame anybody and I very much appreciate all comments. Thank you