Jesse Keating wrote: > If you're putting your potentially destabilizing feature adding version > change into updates-testing, I've already lost my plea. Once in > -testing, it's presumed that it, or something even newer, will be > promoted to -updates, which ruins the whole thing. > Unfortunately, this is driven to some extent by upstreams and their level of sanity. For instance, I'm packaging a project that does one-month time based releases. These releases can have new features and speed improvements. They also have bugfixes. They also have new on-disk formats. The project is a (python) library and commandline tool. The library API can change incompatibly with new releases. So we have two bad choices here. In the course of a released Fedora's life, there are roughly twelve updates from upstream. If those fix major bugs or add a new on-disk formats I pretty much have to update otherwise our end-users suffer (from not being able to communicate with people using Ubuntu, Debian, or upstream). If they change API incompatibly then I'm possibly breaking third-party tools. So here we've lost whether or not we make updates. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
