Bug 1464121

Summary:	Will you consider an update to 4.1.x?
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora EPEL	Reporter:	Pim Rupert <pim>
Component:	BackupPC	Assignee:	Richard Shaw <hobbes1069>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	epel7	CC:	hobbes1069, kevin, stephen
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2017-11-24 14:54:29 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Pim Rupert 2017-06-22 13:20:10 UTC

New updates were released with many welcome enhancements, see http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/BackupPC-4.1.3.html#BackupPC-Introduction

Version 4 is fully backwards compatible with existing version 3 installations. Thus, if the maintainer is willing to update to 4, there are no issues with releasing the updated packages in EPEL. 

Will you consider an update?

Comment 1 Richard Shaw 2017-06-22 15:03:25 UTC

As I have mentioned on the backuppc mailing list, the problem is not that the pool changes are not compatible but that there are configuration changes which an upgrade can not be guaranteed to map correctly breaking someone's installation. 

Another option would be to have a BackupPC4 package for those that want to use it but there are a few problems with that route as well. I don't have a lot of time and the original 3.x version prior to my taking over maintenance violated the Fedora packaging guidelines in a lot of ways. I have made many improvements over time but I still don't believe the package would pass a review today.

Those that want to upgrade may use my COPR which I have kept up to date. 

https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/hobbes1069/BackupPC/

Comment 2 Pim Rupert 2017-07-03 17:18:21 UTC

I have created an issue upstream (https://github.com/backuppc/backuppc/issues/127). 

Perhaps there are possibilities to ensure the configuration of v3 is also compatible with v4, thus eliminating the need to maintain separate packages.

Comment 3 Richard Shaw 2017-09-18 19:29:13 UTC

Do we need to leave this bug open? My COPR is available for anyone who wishes to update and I will continue to maintain it, but doing major upgrades within a RHEL release is highly discouraged.