On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 12:37:16AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: >Josh Boyer wrote: >> I think the words you have choosen here are too strong. There is no >> current policy or requirement that requires that. > >And that's a big problem which needs fixing. Though I'd argue that it's just >common sense and shouldn't need a policy in the first place. Just breaking It is not always cut and dry. >other packages with an incompatible change without giving them a chance to >adapt is the quickest way to degrade Fedora's quality. Quite possibly. Though there are also cases where changes are made that will break a package and upstream has little or no intention of dealing with it in a timeframe that allows Fedora to progress. The whole zope/plone fiasco comes to mind there. I don't think KDE is the same in that regard, and both the KDE SIG and KDE upstream are very active and even proactive on a number of issues. So I agree breaking things is bad, and in general we should all try and play nice and communicate about upcoming changes. Which is exactly what Matthew has done by starting this very thread. Good for him. josh -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
