On 04/03/2014 06:22 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 06:09:43PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
You didn't mention the most important question:
Did the API or ABI change in backward-incompatible way?
If the answer to this question is "yes", then the answer to updating
to gnome-3.12 needs to be no, because such changes in released
versions of Fedora are not allowed.
I think we should ground the discussion in the actual policy, which doesn't
say that, but does say "ABI changes in general are very strongly discouraged
and "Avoid Major version updates, ABI breakage or API changes if at all
possible." That is significantly more qualifed. And more to the point, it
says
Some classes of software will not fit in these guidelines. If your
package does not fit in one of the classes below, but you think it should
be allowed to update more rapidly, propose a new exception class to FESCO
and/or request an exception for your specific update case.
Note that you should open this dialog BEFORE you build or push updates.
You should take the spirit behind this into account:
ABI/API breakages are bad and should be avoided, unless they are
inevitable, because they break and disturb user installations.
which is exactly what is happening here.
That's why I am asking. I want Mr. Clasen or somebody else from Gnome to
provide a clear answer. So far, as I perceive Mr. Clasen, he
deliberately avoided to answer.
<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy>
Now, in reading that policy, there are quite a few things that match the
"Things that would make it less likely to grant a request" list. But, on the
other hand, by having a longer-than-typical Fedora release cycle this time
around, we are already in special circumstances territory.
Ralf
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
