Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 09:29 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: >> I consider ABI compatibility as just one part >> of what defines a stable distro, but, imo, there are certainly cases >> where breaking ABI is justified (for essential features, bug fixes, and >> yes, stability sometimes). > > Please ask RH how they have been handling Core, so far. > > I don't know how many times I've been told: "No API-changes, no ABI > upgrade, no feature upgrades, often not even bugfixes (aka > FIXEDRAWHIDE)"! When it comes to breaking API/ABI, I'd say it's primarily the package maintainers' call to make. You just experienced cases where they chose not to upgrade, which isn't contrary at all to what I described. -- Rex -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
