[Bug 308091] Revision Bump of Bazaar (bzr) to 0.90

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Revision Bump of Bazaar (bzr) to 0.90


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=308091





------- Additional Comments From a.badger at gmail.com  2007-09-26 18:27 EST -------
Hi Michael,
I've been hesitating to update FC6 because there are some radical changes
between bzr-0.16 and bzr-0.91.  Namely, some of the code has been rewritten in
Pyrex and thus compiles to an arch specific module.  For the three packages in
Fedora, I'm able to update them all at once so they move from arch independent
directories to arch specific directories together but external modules that
people have compiled locally and placed in
/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/plugins/ would break on x86_64 machines.

As a bzr user, what do you think is going to cause bzr users the least pain? 
Working with a slightly out-of-date version of bzr or having the upgrade break
unpackaged plugins in this way?

Note: I have 0.91 packaged in devel and could push the changes to both F-7 and
FC-6.  It's just, as I say, a question of whether out-of-datedness or possible
breakage takes precedent here.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.