On Thursday, April 7, 2016 7:54:36 AM CDT Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 04/06/2016 04:49 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>>>> "PP" == Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> PP> This changes meaning regarding to F25. Previous text banned rich > >> PP> strong dependencies in F24 only. This current text extends the ban > >> PP> to all Fedoras. > >> > >> PP> Is that intentional? > >> > >> It's currently correct according to FESCo's request as I understood it. > >> While f25 might still be able to compose, if the tools aren't fixed > >> before the next branch then we'll have to back things out or end up back > >> in a situation where we can't mash updates. > > > > I'd say it's fine for now. Our *hope* is that we will be able to support > > them for F25 at some point, but composes *right now* probably don't work, > > so I think this wording is fine. > > So you don't expect that mash could be fixed/replaced before the F24 > release in June, then? All of the replacements use yum also. The issues may be due to rhel7'a rpm not supporting boolean deps.It is not a small problem to fix and it needs some people to sit down and figure out how to best deal with them. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ReleaseEngineering/PriorityPipeline is some of what we have on our plate to deal with Dennis -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
