(ovitters) I don't really wish for yet another applet. Please just show a notification every so often, or integrate it in the existing applet.
(stormi) yes, what's important is not one same tool or 2 different tools, but what it does. It will probably be an improvement over existing tools rather than a all new tool.
(andre999) I would suggest tagging each backport with "backport", much as most "tainted" and some "nonfree" are tagged. Thus the current tools could be modified, so that when updates are requested, to propose updates of backports only to backports already installed.
Similarly, if *all* tainted were correspondingly tagged, the tools could ensure that a "core" package is never updated to "tainted". (Although this could be done expressly by the user, of course.)
The modifications to existing tools should be relatively minor, so there is no point to create a new tool.
It would be nice if each "nonfree" package were also similarly tagged. Thus the user would be able to more readily recognize "backport", "nonfree" and "tainted" packages. (In rpmdrake these tags would appear in the revision field, and near the end of the package file name.)
If you add the updates tag via drakrpm-edit-media --expert it should work fine. --leuhmanu 13:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
(andre999) Adding the update tag will help, but we only want to update to a newer backport if there is already an older version of the same backport installed. So we should test for that. I would also suggest that when the user selects updating, that we propose updating a backport even if the backport repo is not active (but the update repo is). This way security and bug fix updates to backports are more likely to be applied. Then activating the backport repo will allow proposing all backports, and not just those corresponding to backports already installed.
