2008/9/8 Paul <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Hi, > >> >> 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. > > Sounds fair enough. I have no problems in doing the push... > >> 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. > > No. Stability is a major issue. Remember what rawhide is there for; it's > the testing ground. I have no problems doing the mono packaging, wait a > few months and then bounce it down to stable, but never at the cost of > stability. Release versions need to be treated with cotton gloves as not > everyone is as brave as us nutjobs! > Um, that was bad phrasing on my part. What I intended to say is that new Mono releases tend to be good enough, that stabilizing any new release in Rawhide for a few months would be good enough, and we don't need to duplicate our testing efforts by packaging another different version for F9. Regards, -- Michel Salim http://hircus.jaiku.com/ -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
