On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 09:42 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: > On Thursday 08 February 2007 05:09, Brian Pepple wrote: > > > You want something to be discussed? Send a note to the list in reply to > > this mail and I'll add it to the schedule (I can't promise we will get > > to it tomorrow, but we'll most likely will if we don't run out of time). > > Incompatible package upgrade policy. A good start that probably wouldn't stir > up too heated discussions right from the start would be defining how these > cases must be communicated. Recent example: > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2007-February/msg00069.html I've been working on the Maintainer Responsibility policy for a bit, and there is a section about notifying others about changes that may affect their packages. Is this sufficient, or do you think we should address is somewhere else? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MaintainerResponsibilityPolicy Thanks /B -- Brian Pepple <bpepple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
