On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:47 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:33 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > > Where do you see somebody proposing that no updates be issued? Where do > > you see somebody proposing a setup where fixing a graphics card can't be > > done in the stable release kernel? You've built up a nice strawman that > > you've lovingly kicked down. > > It's implicit in what Jon said; I was pointing out that he was, possibly > inadvertently, suggesting a principle that was far too strict. IMO if hardware enablement can be done at no risk, then ok. But as Jesse said, rebasing some major component to achieve that would not be ok. I don't really want to pick on Xorg since it usually works well. But, in the theoretical sense my own opinion is that it's better to have a few people wait six months for stable support for some new hardware or have to install some additional - separate - packages for that, if there's a risk to the existing users. Existing user experience should come first because they are already running Fedora F-X, not contemplating it. As Jesse also said, how we define breakage varies a lot, too. For example, the latest version of evolution out of the box on F13 treats "Mark Messages as Read" differently from F12. It now wants you to confirm every time you do this, not just on folders that have sub-folders, or when touching the top-level Inbox. Had that behavior changed before the upgrade, I would have regarded it as a form of "breakage" because it affects how one reads mail vs. the day before. Sure, it's not package breakage, but it is a change in behavior. You could say that's not breakage, but it would seem to fall afoul of the existing policy described in the User_base documents on the wiki. Jon. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
