On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 22:21:43 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > So you assume all 500 packagers run a bleeding edge rawhide on a daily > basis? We have test1, test2, ... we have co-maintainers, we *need* to prepare the distribution early enough so we have something to offer when test1 is released. > That's far from being the case. I know. Now what? > I don't for one, do you? Around test1 and afterwards I've tried to prefer rawhide over FC6 as often as possible. > > > > How do a devel cycle and a test period fit into this? If we test > > > > previously built packages on the road to a final product > > > > > > ... like for example 7 months ago, e.g. on FC6 ... > > > > Don't generalise. > > How compatible are our distribution releases with eachother? > > Why rebuild ABI-compatible components? > > Fedora is not known about keeping ABI compatiblity for a long time, in > fact not caring about legacy is part of Fedora's definition and > flexibility. But the gcc, glibc, libstdc++ (and so on) developers inform us about when there are changes that ought to [or must] result in rebuilds. > I think I'll start assigning all bugs that show up due to missing > rebuilds to Michael. :) Do you keep a list already? Put it in the Wiki, and I'm certain, more people will take a close look at it. -- 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
