On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 08:52:13PM -0300, Horst H. von Brand wrote: > Bryn M. Reeves <bmr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 4:21 AM, Bryn M. Reeves <bmr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> I guess it depends how much we care about being close to upstream for this. > > >> If it's worth the effort to move these to libexec, then perhaps putting > > >> compatibility symlinks in place for a couple of releases (with a clear > > >> relnote that they will be removed in a future release and scripts need > > >> updating) could be a way to handle the transition? > > > Adding symlinks does nothing to help, it just delays the pain because > > > people won't read the release notes or won't bother to fix their > > > scripts until the symlinks disappear. Fixing the scripts is trivial, > > > and backwards compatible to boot. > > > No, but having an entry in the release notes for a release or two > > gives something more concrete to point at and say "I told you so" than > > an announcement on the fedora-devel lists which are not read by most > > users (yes, I know that this was announced three years ago upstream, > > but the same comment regarding users not reading things applies). > > It has been announced in git's release notes for more than two years now! I would expect a good number of git users on Fedora don't watch the git upstream. Putting a note in the F11 release notes is perfectly valid, reasonable, and laudable. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
pgpd0f14wSp1D.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
