>> > It would probably be best to run it by FESCo, I guess - I think >> > technically you'd need to do that to get an update policy exception >> > anyway. It would be good to handle it with care and relatively slowly, >> > but just 'losing' an entire release would kinda suck. >> >> Another option would be to provide GNOME 3.12 in a COPR repository, >> which would mean users have the choice to stick with 3.10 or upgrade to >> 3.12. >> The downside would be more maintenance work for GNOME packagers since >> they would need to support 3.10 in Fedora proper and they would probably >> also want to provide bug fixes and updates to 3.12 in the COPR >> repository. >> >> Tadej >> >> -- >> desktop mailing list >> desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop > > > I'm against COPRing GNOME 3.12 due to the maintenance burden it will create, > and the lack of QA stages (updates-testing) in COPR. > If we COPR gnome 3.12, and then have to issue a minor update to it, that > update will not undergo the usual fedora QA procedure of having to wait a > week on testing or get 3 positive votes to be delivered to users. I suggest upping it to something more like 10 positive votes for such a large bump as there's things like soname bumps in Evolution and a bunch of other pretty big bumps (gobject-introspection etc) as part of the release that could conceivably affect other parts of the distro. Peter -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
