On 05/09/2009 01:31 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 18:41 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> >> What Fedora IMHO needs way more is a written document "best practices >> for updates in stable releases" that people actually follow. >> >> Right now some packages in Fedora get often updated while others don't. >> That makes no side happy, as those that prefer to get updates to the >> latest version will sometimes miss them (e.g. the OpenOffice case >> discussed here might be such a case) while those that don't want them >> sometimes can't avoid them (e.g. major kernel updates from 2.6.27 to >> 2.6.29 that fix security bugs). That sucks. Chose a side and then try to >> stick to it. >> >> And sure, the decision when to update or not in the end needs to be done >> by the package maintainers. There always will be special cases where >> updates/not to update is the better decision even if the guidelines say >> something else. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Package_update_guidelines we have this. What we don't seem to have is everybody following it. > > I read this - openoffice 3.0 to 3.1 has been a long time in the works ... updating or not would both be consistent with those guidelines .. so what is your point exactly ? Or are trying to argue by obtuse reference? The point is, in this case, it may well be a reasonable update .. just as reasonable decisions have been made for many others. It is the maintainers decision - we just don't all have to agree ... ... reasonable people may disagree - but not with pedantry however. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
