Core + Exrtas 2

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 09:29 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 11:35 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> >> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 09:13 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> >>>> No, he's asking about introducing new packages to a released product. 
> >>>> Say
> >>>> Fedora 7 goes out the door with a given package set.  Three weeks later a
> >>>> great new package gets added to the Fedora universe, what kind of policy
> >>>> would there be in making this package available to the Fedora 7 users?
> >>> IMO, basically like FE has been doing it, so far, except that breaking
> >>> APIs, ABIs and packages deps etc. must not happen.
> >> That language may be a bit too strong, as I can think of cases where an
> >> essential update may end up breaking ABI, though it's not unreasonable to
> >> to make policy such that it *should* (not must) be avoided.
> 
> > Well, this "must" is the core point about all this - Fedora should be a
> > stable distro.
> 
> I guess we disagree then.
<bitter sarcasm>
Welcome to the wonderful "world of rawhide" - Good Night, Fedora!

You once had been a usable distro, but your masters now seem to be
wanting to convert you into a jungle :(
</bitter sarcasm>

>   I consider ABI compatibility as just one part
> of what defines a stable distro, but, imo, there are certainly cases
> where breaking ABI is justified (for essential features, bug fixes, and
> yes, stability sometimes).

Please ask RH how they have been handling Core, so far.

I don't know how many times I've been told: "No API-changes, no ABI
upgrade, no feature upgrades, often not even bugfixes (aka
FIXEDRAWHIDE)"!

Ralf