Josh Boyer wrote:
On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 18:01 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
The current thinking seems to be to just ignore them* but this is
guaranteed to result in a lot of confusion. When end users do a
distribution upgrade via yum or Anaconda, some of the packages might not
have been updated to the Fedora 7 version due to incorrect packaging or
other issues while the rest are packages which are deliberated not
rebuild to avoid churn. Debugging a end user system with such a mix of
packages is very painful.
I would suggest that we consider rebuilding just to avoid the confusion.
I consider that a good enough "technical reason". The advantage of less
churn in packages is lost quickly since packages receive updates fairly
quickly in general.
If packages receive updates fairly quickly, then why are there still
packages in devel that have .fc6 as the disttag in the repo? I find
your assertion to have empirical evidence to the contrary.
Note that I said that packages in Fedora gets updates in general
quickly. Not that all packages get updates. If every package got updates
then we wouldn't need to have a discussion at all about this. So let's
not side track and see if we can have some consensus on the approach
that we need to take on packages with fc6 in their names.
Rahul
--
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
