On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 16:28 -1000, Warren Togami wrote: > May I also suggest creating a category of packages where it is generally > OK to upgrade the version because: > 1) There is no ABI to break because it is a leaf-node package, like > ethereal. > 2) Nobody expects ABI compat, like ethereal. > 3) Or ABI/API is maintained, like gaim-1.x or spamassassin-3.x. Plugins > built against gaim-1.0 are supposed to continue work with any future > gaim-1.x. > > Fedora Legacy can save time and effort by simply following the newer > Fedora Core releases on these packages when it is safe to upgrade > versions. No review necessary, but perhaps some testing and ACK votes > to push. That's pretty much what we do already...ethereal, spamassassin and gaim are pretty much rebuilt with the latest FC release... Although it would be great just to be able to rebuild the packages without meddling with them. Would you be willing to integrate some more options in the FC gaim spec file to target FL releases? Marc.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
