>>>>> "JK" == Jesse Keating writes: JK> On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 23:42 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> Jesse Keating wrote: >> > Are you finding what is sent there to not be relevant or important to >> > you as a packager? I'm the moderator of that list and I don't think >> > I've sent or let anything through that wasn't useful. >> >> Well, if the proposal is to send any and all soname bumps there, this will >> make it much higher volume. And really, nobody needs to know about "library >> libxyz which is only used by package xyz which is maintained by the same >> packager has a new soname". ;-) >> >> Kevin Kofler JK> Well sure, that's a tad ridiculous. However the solution there is to JK> alter when its required to send, instead of creating yet another list to JK> send the silly announcements to, or whatever else. Indeed, which is why I also suggested in the thread above, the following exception in the response to Thorsten's original, which should address Kevin's concern: > However, there should definitely be a few exceptions to the rule of > announcement if maintainer performing the breakage, either 1) owns > all the affected packages and is planning to rebuild them, or 2) is > a provenpackager/co-maintainer, or otherwise has access and who is > intending to rebuild all affected packages > (e.g. xulrunner/firefox). In those cases, a heads-up on f-d-l might > be nice, but probably not mandatory (although even in thoses cases > there may be dependent packages that the maintainer is not aware > of). Alex -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
