On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 10:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > 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. You are running things around here - you, me, and everybody :) Remember, packages for Branched releases go through the whole updates-testing / Bodhi process, and the release images are spun from packages which *pass* updates-testing: so you get an opportunity to explain politely to the glibc developers that they are on crack and should re-consider, before the package really becomes a part of F15 proper. In fact, you can see this has already happened: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.13.90-11 has -6 karma at present. When it hit -3, it got unpushed. Of course, this reminds us of a problem in Bodhi where an update's karma isn't reset to 0 when it's edited, because the glibc devs sent out a fixed build - 11 - but it's still at -6 karma. Still, the process works! (Luke, any chance that's going to get fixed in Bodhi soon?) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
