Another Packaging/Review Guidlines clarification

Michael Schwendt bugs.michael at
Sat Apr 15 14:42:08 UTC 2006

On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 15:03:10 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:

> How about adding something like:
> > Must - A package should always use the latest stable upstream release.
> > If for any reason this isn't possible, this has to be explained in the
> > review / review request.
> to the Packaging/Review Guidelines? Not sure if this should be a MUST or

-1  for MUST

+1  for an explanation when the latest stable upstream differs

I believe we should focus on _stuff that works_, regardless of whether
that is during the review process or for updates done to existing packages
in FE. What upstream declares "stable" may not be mature enough for Fedora
Extras. Often the newest stable release announced by upstream is sort of a
beta release because many users didn't try it when it was still in CVS/SVN
or an official alpha/beta/rc version. Then, fixes to the stable release
are published in quick succession. Brown paperbag bugs are discovered
often, too. Packagers should be encouraged not to engage in a release-race
with upstream, but to monitor upstream's releases and find a good time for
a good release which to use in FE.

More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list