Thoughts on FC and the future..

[Sam Barnett-Cormack]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, William Hooper wrote:

>
> WipeOut said:
> > I agree that this scenario is possible but (and I may be wrong) aren't
> > most scripting languages usually backwards compatible in that a script
> > created for an older version of the scripting language would usually
> > still run on the newer vertsion..
>
> As I said, an example.  Looking at the Rawhide yum changelog:
>
> - patch to work with python 2.3 from Seth
>
> So maybe it was a yum issue, not a python issue.  You still get the same
> result: a broken yum.
>
> Another example would be any incompatable change with glibc because that
> would kill rpm.

I think that's a pretty weak argument given that other distros have had
no problem with similar things for quite some time. Given that fedora is
without-warranty anyway, you don't have to worry about it causing
complaints. Maybe don't make it the default, but I think for fedora to
be acceptable to many people it will have to be able to do rolling
upgrades sanely.

-- 

Sam Barnett-Cormack
Software Developer                           |  Student of Physics & Maths
UK Mirror Service (http://www.mirror.ac.uk)  |  Lancaster University