<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> <title></title> </head> <body text="#000099" bgcolor="#ffffff"> On 05/09/2009 11:28 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:1241882902.2886.50.camel@localhost.localdomain" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 12:51 +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Well, in this case updating F-10 3.1 properly would require updating a load of other stuff as well with all the risks and work that entails. But even if that wasn't the case I generally don't bump major versions of OOo in a released product. I see our fedora release cycle as ones of iterative stable complete releases, rather than one which has an always-open pool of stable packages which always contains the latest stable version of a package. i.e. F-10 was history as soon as it was released, and F-11 is likewise almost dead to me already :-) Not that I won't fix bugs in them, just that I don't see them as live development releases. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> I thank you for this! </pre> </blockquote> -2 - I dont thank you at all. That is silly. We are happy to have kernel updates, and a minor but useful openoffice update is hardly a huge risk ... put it in testing and let people see if any issues arise - i'd be happy to try it from testing. I might agree that we shud leave openoffice 4.1 for fedora 12 ... but 3.0 to 3.1 .. sighs ... g/ </body> </html>