Hi, On Sat, 2004-05-01 at 00:50, Per Bjornsson wrote: > On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 14:23, Alexander Larsson wrote: > > On Tue, 2004-04-20 at 16:36, David Wagoner wrote: > > > I was reading the Gnome release schedule and saw that > > > Gnome 2.6.1 is going to be released very soon with a > > > lot of bug fixes, some new translations and a few > > > performance improvements and was curious if it is > > > going to make it into FC2 or if a patched version of > > > Gnome 2.6.0 will be used. > > > > It'll likely be 2.6.0 + some patches from cvs since we're frozen by now. > > Since the stable Gnome release series really seem pretty regression-safe > (well, at least that's my impression of how the Gnome project is > managed), would it be possible to get releases in the stable series as > updates for FC2 even if they don't make it into the original release? > > If the answer is "no", is it because of perceived destabilization or > because it takes time from new development? Its about potential destabilisation, yes. Every code change, no matter how trivial it may seem, brings with it the risk of introducing regressions or weird side effects. Therefore, at this stage in the release cycle its good practise to weigh up the benefit each code change brings versus the potential for introducing other bugs. Mass updating all of GNOME to 2.6.1 sounds like it should be safe, but each change in that update has a risk associated with it. The fun thing about risks is that they are cumulative so the chances are that something somewhere would break with the update and we have no way of anticipating how bad the breakage might be. Really, the best strategy at this point is just to backport important fixes. Don't get me wrong, as many of us are the upstream maintainers we'd love to see us update to the latest packages, but doing so would not be exercising the appropriate risk management. Cheers, Mark.
