On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:25 AM, Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 8/30/10 8:56 PM, Arthur Pemberton wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:09 PM, Gerald Henriksen <ghenriks@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 23:11:06 +0200, you wrote: >>> >>>> A typical developer wants the dependencies of the software they are >>>> working on to be _very_ up to date - probably not the upstream >>>> development version, but the upstream maintenance version with _all_ >>>> current bug fixes. Waiting 6 months for a bug fix does not make sense - >>>> at that point the developer would be tempted to build the new version >>>> locally. >>> >>> While I admit I haven't followed things very closely, I don't believe >>> anyone is saying don't issue bugfixes. What is being said is don't >>> upgrade versions just because something newer and shinier comes along >>> in the middle of a release. >>> >>> So in other words, dependency 1.6 to 1.6.1 is okay as it is likely a >>> bug fix, but 1.6 to 1.8 is not okay because it is a new release. >> >> >> 6 months for new features in a fast paced distro? >> > > New features hit rawhide all the time, with no waiting period. So developers are going to put new features into rawhide knowing that they will never make it to updates? > The fact that we can get a reasonably stable release out every 6 months > including all these new features is pretty fast paced and amazing. I seem to remember new features coming faster before. -- Fedora 13 (www.pembo13.com) -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
