2008/9/8 David Nielsen <gnomeuser@xxxxxxxxx>: > > > Den 8. sep. 2008 19.48 skrev Paul <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> >> Hi, >> >> I've just been notified that RC1 of Mono is due to be tagged today at >> some point with RC2 (final) on the 10th. Given the date difference of >> only 2 days, I'll be packaging Mono 2.0 for rawhide. >> >> Future plans. >> >> Currently the mono stack for Fedora is a bit of a mess over the three >> versions available. What I'm proposing for future mono/libgdiplus >> releases is this. >> >> Mono 2.0 is released on the 10th and packaged for rawhide >> Mono 1.9.1 is then released on F9 >> >> The stack is then rebuilt to cover gtk-sharp2 et al so that by the end >> of the process rawhide is one version ahead of core. >> >> When Mono 2 becomes 2.9, version 2 is released onto core and so on. >> This, in theory, should kill the problems experienced with the likes of >> monodevelop in core. It also means that core is operating on the stable >> release. >> >> An alternative is that after a couple of months proving on rawhide, the >> rawhide version is pushed to core. > > I admit I much prefer the latter method, it keeps the stack roughly the same > accross releases which means our users have access to the latest bug fixes > and a version that is supported by upstream. It also keeps the amount of > code actively supported as low as possible. Aggressively pushing vetted > versions of the Mono stack seems like the wisest plan to me. As a bonus, we > also gain the ability to push the latest and thus often the only supported > version of Mono using apps in our stable repos, something our users expect - > just watch the Banshee mailing list, not only do our users expect the latest > to be available but upstreams first reply to potential problems is nearly > always to install the latest supported version. > I concur; the Mono stack seems to be monotonically (pun alert!) increasing in usability, that the benefits of maintaining a single Mono major version across our supported releases outweigh the stability concerns. Would we have time to get 2.0 into F-9, and rebuild the Mono stack there, or do we need an interim release of currently-FTBFS Mono packages? (thinking of Monodevelop here. Wouldn't want it blacklisted) -- Michel Salim http://hircus.jaiku.com/ -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
