* Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> [2011-07-25 15:54]: > Toshio Kuratomi (a.badger@xxxxxxxxx) said: > > Robyn and I have talked about how the feature process could be adapted to > > allow for more late work to occur however none of that talk has turned into > > anything solid yet. One point that bears on this is that the Feature Owners > > must be willing to commit to doing all the work involved in coordination > > when they submit something late. In other words, if Java 7 update went in > > well before the feature deadline, the expectation would be that packagers > > whose packages depended on Java would need to adapt to Java 7. The > > expectation now that the Feature Freeze has passed is that the people > > pushing Java 7 into the repos would also need to seek out and fix all the > > packages that depend on them that are broken. > > Would we actually be shipping only 7, or both 6 and 7? > This hasn't been debated yet, but I am very much in favour of having only 7 in Fedora 16. If the reason for asking was w.r.t re-builds, it is unlikely that most applications will need a rebuild -- only those using deprecated APIs (which would have been deprecated for years now) and private APIs would be affected. That would likely be a small subset. Opinions from others are welcome.. Cheers, Deepak -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
