On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 2:24 AM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/12/2010 06:52 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> >>> If you don't even agree with a basic principle that breaking ABI should be >>> avoided in updates, we don't really have much left to discuss. >>> >> I don't see this as being a "basic principle" at all. For an enterprise >> distro like RHEL or CentOS, sure. But not for something like Fedora. What >> counts is that all software in Fedora depending on the library gets rebuilt >> and pushed at the same time. (That's what grouped updates are for.) We do >> not support third-party software. >> > I disagree. Imagining that we are living in a island where no software > exists outside the repository is just delusional and the assumption that > everyone has the bandwidth to deal with all that churn is wrong as > well. I should make people sit in a dial-up connection and have them > update software now and then to bring them back to the ground. And i disagree here. People like that have to face that Fedora or any similar distro isn't for them. If they live in dial-up-land, they should use something like RHEL, CentOS, Debian stable or whatever. OR they learn to read documentation, understand the packagemanagement and how to update only security fixes. -- LG Thomas Dubium sapientiae initium -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
