"JK" == Jesse Keating writes:
JK> On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 23:42 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote:
Are you finding what is sent there to not be relevant or important to you as a packager? I'm the moderator of that list and I don't think I've sent or let anything through that wasn't useful.
Well, if the proposal is to send any and all soname bumps there, this will make it much higher volume. And really, nobody needs to know about "library libxyz which is only used by package xyz which is maintained by the same packager has a new soname". ;-)
Kevin Kofler
JK> Well sure, that's a tad ridiculous. However the solution there is to JK> alter when its required to send, instead of creating yet another list to JK> send the silly announcements to, or whatever else.
Indeed, which is why I also suggested in the thread above, the following exception in the response to Thorsten's original, which should address Kevin's concern:
However, there should definitely be a few exceptions to the rule of announcement if maintainer performing the breakage, either 1) owns all the affected packages and is planning to rebuild them, or 2) is a provenpackager/co-maintainer, or otherwise has access and who is intending to rebuild all affected packages (e.g. xulrunner/firefox). In those cases, a heads-up on f-d-l might be nice, but probably not mandatory (although even in thoses cases there may be dependent packages that the maintainer is not aware of).
Alex