Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Le 24/09/2013 15:50, Reindl Harald a écrit :
> 
> 
> Am 24.09.2013 15:41, schrieb Remi Collet:
>> Le 24/09/2013 12:35, Reindl Harald a écrit :
>> 
>>> and that is why ist *is wrong* to give negative karma because
>>> some extension is not updated - who says that the extension RPM
>>> is relevant for all users?
>> 
>> I don't agree. Broken dep are not acceptable in "stable" release
> 
> if one person maintains thunderbird and the other one lightning how
> do you imagine that both packages are built at the same moment and
> get the same karma?
> 
> this is a organisation problem and again:

I agree on the "organisation problem", but only on that.

> a broken depdendency for lightning is *never* a reason to give
> thunderbird bad karma - you do not need the lightning RPM at all,
> install the extension as most others are not in the repos from
> mozilla.org

Yes. You can also use Thunderbird from mozilla.org, libreoffice from ...
And switch from Fedora to LFS.

First a reminder: we have an update policy which explicitly explain
why we should not update, to not break things like that in a stable
release.
	http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy

So (as far as security bug are fixed) it is absolutely fine to keep
Thunderbird 17.0.x in Fedora 18/19.

Ok. Mozilla stuff have an exception and update to each major version
(which make sense for Firefox, but probably not for Thunderbird, as we
only provide the ESR version)

> and even if both packages are built at the same time there are more
> using TB and giving positive karma because they simply do not have
> a dep-problem and so you can't make the push synchron in most
> cases

In such case this is the responsibility of the xulrunner or
thunderbird owner to rebuild all the packages which need to be and to
publish all the packages in a single update.

> that's why --skip-broken exists

Definitively not acceptable.

Remi.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlJBn1cACgkQYUppBSnxahi+RACgnka4Ag24WVqYrF2250pvyjgA
3OkAoN1fmTMXbWofA4qW7rcg0VUV4JyC
=PTpm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux