Dne 9.10.2015 v 16:16 Adam Jackson napsal(a):
On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 13:50 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I agree - the new wording does appear to give in to poor programming
practices.
Bundling is _not_ intrinsically poor practice. Firefox is a good
example of this, there have been several cases where using the system
instance of cairo has been a regression relative to the bundled
version, because firefox relied on the internal details of how a
particular version of cairo worked, and a newer and ostensibly better
cairo would break those assumptions.
IMHO all we need is to support multiple version of same library
to be installable -- that's mine point why usability of Fedora
is miles behind other distros.
Yeah - in ideal world - everyone uses always the latest library
and the library is perfectly compatible.
But in the real-world - version changes, it gets incompatible,
requires some new way how to use it and so on....
So for the real-world we simply need to be able to keep multiple
version of e.g. cairo
until all apps used by users gets migrated to new version - it's that simple.
And BTW we don't need to go long way example - even core libs like
systemd/udev tends to break compatibility from time to time.
Thus supporting multiple lib of same package would have forced developers to
think about their API instead of rebuilding whole Rawhide every second week
just because library changes....
This also solve the issue - when some no longer - but still very usable APP is
missing - because I'd be able to pick old libs - and downgrade rest of my
rawhide - or not having app at all.
I really think rules should reflect real world - and not some kind of
virtual ideal universe - it should be a goal - but not with the price any
Fedora user has to pay ATM...
Zdenek
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
