On Tuesday, August 31, 2010 16:14:39 Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 03:57:47PM +0200, Michal Hlavinka wrote: > > > 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. > > > > there's no reason why 1.8 won't be ok after 2-3 weeks in updates-testing > > I hope you are kidding. nope, I'm 100 % serious > Of course, these imaginary numbers aren't very helpful -- some programs > make only minor changes between whole-version-number releases, whereas > others revolutionize the whole project beteen 0.88 and 0.89. > > The policy can't be based on version numbers -- it has to be on potential > risk. Note: I agree there should be no updates breaking something - for example when configuration files from old version does not work with new version. That's out of the question. Fedora is not the only distro using (and testing) some program/library. Also there is very low potential risk to have some problem in F n-1 if the package works fine in F n. I really don't see any problem with: new version in rawhide and Fn updates-testing (after two weeks) updates for Fn, updates-testing for F n-1 (after two weeks) updates for F n-1, updates-testing for F n-2 Fedora = “Freedom, Friends, Features, *First*” -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
