Hello Matthew, Friday, March 12, 2010, 1:47:18 PM, you wrote: > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 01:19:07PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >> A) Fedora requires backports for problems that break ABI. Note that this >> also means that Fedora may need to have people who create non-upstreamable >> patches to software since some upstream fixes may require ABI changes and >> we'd need to fix those a different way. > Other distributions manage this without too much trouble, so I don't see > it being a problem to adopt this policy. > -- > Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 1 word: Resources - person power, time, funding, equipment, etc. Fedora is a free software distribution "staffed" informally by volunteers (except for that minority of folks who may be paid to work on Fedora as their day job). RHEL has the resources to backport. Centos uses those backpotrs for free, but does not generate them (unless again the party supporting a component for Centos happens to be upstream in RHEL). At times Fedora barely has the resources to stumble forward from release to release. Adding more mandatory costs for older releases is simply not practical or possible. Then there is the whole "voluntary" part of volunteer. Backporting can be difficult, time consuming, frustrating, or simply impossible. The incentive of $$ from paying customers simply is not there. -- Best regards, Al mailto:al.dunsmuir@xxxxxxxxxxxx -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
