Re: Providing ABI/API assurances for the base runtime in Fedora.

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

 



On 2017-09-01, Carlos O'Donell <carlos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I've written up some of the key ideas here:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BaseRuntimeInterface
>
> Any feedback would be appreciated, including bikeshed on component
> name prefix for frozen interface pakcages e.g. base-*.
>
What if there is a bug in the behavior of the frozen base-* packages? Do
we have to live with the bug for the rest of the life time of the base
(=platform)? Or do we break this rule and replace the broken package
with a patched one?

If the second one is the answer, do we know how it will affect packages
whose build script does run-time checks (i.e. every ./configure script)
to tune compile-time options?

More strictly speaking, will we be adding new features into the same stream of
the base module? I guess we won't. Otherwise we have to update the
frozen base-* packages accordingly to make the new features available at
build-time of packages that want to use the new features.

-- Petr
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[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