----- Original Message ----- > From: "Toshio Kuratomi" <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> > To: "For participants of the Documentation Project" <docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 8:37:10 AM > Subject: Re: F20 Self Contained Change: GLIBC 2.18 > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 04:14:22PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On 2013-07-08 7:52, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > >= Proposed Self Contained Change: GLIBC 2.18 = > > > > ?! > > > > A bump of glibc seems like virtually the definition of a system-wide > > change. Sure, it's _intended_ to be transparently compatible with > > 2.17, but we've seen how that goes before. > > > +1 > > For most libraries I think that an api-compatible version bump wouldn't need > to even go through the Planning process. But some things, like glibc, are > depended upon by so many other things that they need to be system-wide > changes so that people can be on the lookout for unexpected problems that it > might cause. Is it just a matter of "requires a mass rebuild of some sort? If yes, then $X; if no, then $Y" ? > > -Toshio > > -- > docs mailing list > docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs -- docs mailing list docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs
