2010/3/5 Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 11:15 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> > We have a written down policy that specifically recommends that our >> > maintainers consider the issue of regressions seriously and not push >> > every upstream release into the updates repository >> > >> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_guidelines >> >> 1. That policy is not mandatory, just indicative: >> "These are not intended to be prescriptive rules. Package maintainers are >> expected to to exercise their own common sense and good judgement." >> 2. That policy doesn't say that no new versions or even no feature upates >> should be pushed. Quite the opposite > >> So I don't see that policy as backing your claims at all. > > That's because you're misreading Rahul's claims. Rahul was replying to a > post which claimed Fedora has a 'policy' of being 'bleeding edge'. > Rahul's point is that we don't, and the only policy we do have - even > though, as he specifically notes, it's a weak one (he says 'specifically > recommends', not 'requires') - is rather the opposite. If you'd left in > the context from the post Rahul was replying to, this would have been > clear. Although when it was approved by fesco, it was discussed under the term "Update description guidelines", and from the short discussion archived on http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/fesco/FESCo-2009-02-05.html it is not at all clear that the main intention was to discourage updates to stable releases. Instead the main focus was on the update descriptions. - Thomas -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
