On 10/24/07, Richi Plana <myfedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > As for the second issue (delaying non-essential updates which break), if > we look at the most common use-case, we have the ff. actors: the package > maintainer for the package that breaks (A), the package maintainer/s for > the package that depend on the breaking one (B), and the users who do > "yum update"s (C). It's my contention that (A)'s update should be > delayed pending the resolution of (B)'s packages or a certain amount of > time has passed. I won't even begin to argue who is responsible for > coordinating with who ((A) or (B)). I just believe that (C) shouldn't > have to be involved. > > And yes, I can't wait till xulrunner is its own separate package. > -- > > Richi Plana > > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list > -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
