On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Panu Matilainen wrote: >> >> Are we ready to consider a brand new RPM version for F11, amidst all this >> mass-rebuild-for-strong-hash chaos and just days to go to development >> freeze? >> >> We just put out first rpm 4.7.0 beta: >> http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-announce/2009-February/000016.html. This >> is nothing like the 4.4.2.x -> 4.6.0 leap-of-faith upgrade last year but >> it's still non-trivial amount of changes to get the kind of memory use and >> performance improvements that 4.7.0 has, which is why it's not just 4.6.1. >> >> The wording of Fedora Feature policy pretty explicitly singles out each >> RPM upgrade to be a Feature... I would like to hear a preliminary opinion on >> it: if everybody is going to be an outright "NO!" then I'm not going to >> waste my time with writing up a Feature page. If it's "maybe" or "it >> depends" then ok, will submit as a feature in time for tomorrows FESCo >> meeting. >> >> So, should I bother with a RPM 4.7 feature page or not? > > > One question: > > "# Support for the new XZ (aka LZMA) compression format in package payloads > and sources has been added." > > Is this still considered experimental? Are we considering switching to it by > default? Any benchmarks? We can't this would require another rebuild, so this should be F12 material -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
