On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 09:45 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > At any point, upstream VBox can put out a new release requiring a new ABI, > which would mean that: > > a) any user that upgrades VBox would be broken until Fedora puts out an > update for all supported releases to match > b) any user that hasn't upgraded VBox but upgrades Fedora with the new > modules from a) would be broken until they upgrade VBox Exactly. Other hypervisors (vmware for instance) have the common engineering discipline (and, you know, taste) to version their interfaces. We have drivers for those and I'm told they even work. Getting that level of support for vbox would require that _we_ discover their interface changes and figure out how to not merely package compatibility with them all but pick the right one at runtime. If someone really wanted to do all that typing, and if those interfaces are discoverable from the guest, then certainly that's a goal one could accomplish. Personally that's not a workload I find at all interesting, particularly when it's work vbox are shirking in the first place. Maybe whether I find it interesting isn't a concern, maybe it's a goal we decide to have anyway, but if we do so we might want to consider what we're willing to sacrifice to get it, or alternatively, how we're going to staff the role. - ajax -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
