On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 12:17 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > I've always assumed that we're supposed to try and not break the > upgrade path for (N-1+updatesForN-1) to (N+updatesForN). Is that not > the case? It's the only case we can realistically try for. > > > Are you suggesting some distro release level super epoch? > > > > I've often wondered why we don't have such a thing, but I've always > noticed that discussions around these sorts of ideas usually become a > bit of a flame fest. Yeah, I haven't put a lot of effort into such a thing myself. It'd be far easier if we didn't have multiple active releases at any time, or didn't allow version bumps in N-* releases. Of course, those are even more "flamey" topics. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
