Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> No the question is what do the glibc maintainers think they are doing >> introducing changes like this in a branched release. This sort of stuff >> should be in rawhide. >> >> These guys are in no way useful at helping create a distro, can we >> request a fedora glibc maintainer who understands how to follow a >> release schedule. > The largest problem comes from upstream glibc using the Fedora > schedule as their development schedule. So 2.13.90 will become 2.14 > shortly after Fedora 15 reaches RC. (I've asked a number of times for > it to release _before_ RC, but no luck there). My assumption is that > pre-release Fedora users are being used as glibc beta testers to get > broader coverage. Well, if they think this is their beta test period, it still merits asking why the heck this type of change is going in now. I agree with Dave that this looks like development material, not near-release bug fixing. It's particularly bad that they are making what amount to API changes long after all dependent packages are frozen. Who knows how many F15 packages are now going to ship in a FTBFS state? If I were running things around here, this change would get reverted for F15. Rawhide, it's fine in. regards, tom lane -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
