-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/25/2015 06:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sun, 2015-10-25 at 19:53 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: >> On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 01:07:47 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek >> wrote: >>> I built 4.1 for rawhide. If that checks out to be OK, I can >>> push an update for F23 also. >> >> I do not understand why a major rebase could be permitted after >> all the F-23 freezing stages? It may cause FTBFSes or even >> broken builds. What is then all the release engineering good >> for? Why not to just run Rawhide then? >> >> This situation may be a FAQ, sorry I do not read every mail here. >> I did not want to be negative/discouraging, just I have seen such >> FTBFS regression(s) in Fedora in the past. > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy > > Since we're frozen for Final at this point, non-blocker/FE updates > effectively have to respect the 'stable releases' policy, since > they will only go out as updates for F23 Final. That states: > > "As a result, we should avoid major updates of packages within a > stable release. Updates should aim to fix bugs, and not introduce > features, particularly when those features would materially affect > the user or developer experience." > > "Package maintainers MUST: > > Avoid Major version updates, ABI breakage or API changes if at all > possible. Avoid changing the user experience if at all possible. > Avoid updates that are trivial or don't affect any Fedora users." > > There isn't any body tasked with policing this, exactly - no-one > whose job it is to look at every package update and see if it meets > the rules - but if you think an update is inappropriate you can > post a comment and/or contact the package maintainer directly. If > you try this and the maintainer does not agree there's a problem, > and you're really concerned about it, you can escalate to the FPC, > I believe. > I'm of the opinion that a new minor release of GNU make is likely not going to fit with the stable updates policy. I would be much happier if that went to Rawhide only at this point. We wouldn't change libtool, autoconf or gcc at this point, so I don't think it makes sense to change make either. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlYuHnEACgkQeiVVYja6o6MDuACfSblsJJGjNj1cIILgzN6irLD3 7KsAoJUglKY7uQMR4vcFn5bOeHIbAbNP =LXjU -----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
