On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 10:27:33AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 13. 05. 24 v 23:22 Nils Philippsen napsal(a): > > On Mon, 2024-05-13 at 14:58 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Why would you push Gimp 3 into Fedora <= 40? > > Why wouldn’t I? It’s technically feasible without really jumping > > through hoops, and I don’t want to force users to upgrade the OS – or > > wait for Fedora 41 to be at a level of stability acceptable to them – > > before they can use the new version. > > > I am not against Gimp 3 in F40 and older per se. But the issue is that it > drives you towards `gimp3` for compatibility reasons. IOW I think that it > would be perfectly fine to have Gimp 2 (gimp package) as default in F40 and > Gimp 3 (still gimp package) in F41+. Because while they might be > substantially different, the change happens with major Fedora version and > users should be prepared for such changes. > > IOW situation would be much easier if `gimp` package was Gimp 2 up until F40 > and Gimp 3 since F41. Optionally, it would also make sense to provide > `gimp2` package in F41 for backward compatibility. That is all true, but this approach is still compatible with the way that the repos and srpms are named. It's entirely fine to build gimp.srpm → gimp.rpm and gimp3.srpm → gimp3.rpm in F40, and gimp.srpm → gimp2.rpm and gimp3.srpm → gimp.rpm in F41+. This is similar to how python3.rpm is currently build from python3.12.srpm in F40 and python3.13.srpm in F41. Zbyszek -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
