some closure on the xorg updates issue

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Rahul schrieb:
> Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Rahul <sundaram <at> fedoraproject.org> writes:
>>>>> In short, it's a major change with only modest benefit, and a 
>>>>> better solution is coming soon.
>>>> And what IS that "better solution"?
>>> A well defined updates policy with the release engineering team to 
>>> grant exceptions when required.
>>> Draft at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UpdatesPolicy
>> And how is that a solution to the problem that an X.Org update is 
>> needed to add support for some hardware (Intel) and improve support 
>> for others (ATI r3xx/r4xx)?
> It is not. We cant put everything that goes into rawhide into the 
> general releases as update. [...]

Agreed for things like gnome 2.x -> 2.(x+2), but hardware support is a 
special case IMHO. Consider this hypothetical example:

early april 20xx: FCx get releases with Xorg y.z
mid april 20xx: Xorg y.(z+1) gets released with new drivers
end april 20xx: Intel releases Chipset G1015 with integrated graphics
early may 20xx: Intel releases updated drivers for G1015 that require 
Xorg y.(z+1)

Those buying a Mainboard with G1015 need a solution then. They don't 
want to wait 5 month until the next proper FC release. Or 2 month for a 
beta (and most people don't want to run a beta).

CU
thl