----- Original Message -----
Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> writes:
> On 11/03/13 06:28 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> That's not readily apparent in the Updates Policy ...
> Ah, you're right, I really should have checked it before posting
> (yet
> again). I was thinking that it discouraged *all* version updates,
> not
> just "major" ones. I personally would still be hesitant to update a
> package to a new upstream version if I didn't know what the heck
> was in
> it, but that is indeed apparently just a personal preference and
> not a
> policy :)
I think there's no substitute for knowing your upstream --- and
therefore, not a whole lot of scope for a one-size-fits-all
distro-wide
policy.
Yep, it was my main concern when these rules were set-up - every upstream
is different. And you have to know your upstream and understand their
release policies. So sometimes it ends up I just update to a new version
even without Changelog (sometimes it's just forgotten) if I trust the
upstream and I know even this update will be valuable. Even I feel a
bit bad in such case ;-)
Jaroslav
In my case, I work mostly with upstreams that are pretty
conservative
about what they fix in minor releases, and I would think it
irresponsible *not* to push out their minor updates into released
Fedora branches. Other upstreams are a lot different though.
I'm for leaving this to the package maintainer's discretion. Now,
there's no harm in having the guidelines try to explain how to
exercise
that discretion. Maybe the existing text could use refinement. It
doesn't seem that bad as it stands, though.
regards, tom lane
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel