Hi,

I'm expecting the next beta of Mono to hit the servers today. There are
quite a few changes since 1.9.1-2, so please be aware that things may be
broken and need rebuilding.

Sorry about that. In the words of the good book "Normal service will be
resumed just as soon as we know what normal is anyway"

Also, please note that as of Mono 2.0, the licence changes to MIT rather
that the mix and match that it currently is. This is happening right
across the mono family as of version 2 (though probably not for the
likes of gtk-sharp2 and gnome-sharp)

TTFN

Paul
--
Sie können mich aufreizen und wirklich heiß machen!
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

2008/7/18 Paul <paul@all-the-johnsons.co.uk>:

Hi,



I'm expecting the next beta of Mono to hit the servers today. There are

quite a few changes since 1.9.1-2, so please be aware that things may be

broken and need rebuilding.



Sorry about that. In the words of the good book "Normal service will be

resumed just as soon as we know what normal is anyway"



Also, please note that as of Mono 2.0, the licence changes to MIT rather

that the mix and match that it currently is. This is happening right

across the mono family as of version 2 (though probably not for the

likes of gtk-sharp2 and gnome-sharp)



I think you should wait that the Buildsys outage pass first.



--
Xavier.t Lamien
--
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/XavierLamien

GPG-Key ID: F3903DEB
Fingerprint: 0F2A 7A17 0F1B 82EE FCBF 1F51 76B7 A28D F390 3DEB

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

18. jul. 2008 12.00 skrev Paul <paul@all-the-johnsons.co.uk>:

Hi,



I'm expecting the next beta of Mono to hit the servers today. There are

quite a few changes since 1.9.1-2, so please be aware that things may be

broken and need rebuilding.



Sorry about that. In the words of the good book "Normal service will be

resumed just as soon as we know what normal is anyway"



Also, please note that as of Mono 2.0, the licence changes to MIT rather

that the mix and match that it currently is. This is happening right

across the mono family as of version 2 (though probably not for the

likes of gtk-sharp2 and gnome-sharp)
Rock.. are you planning to push all of this to F8/F9 once it settles down?


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

David Nielsen (gnomeuser@gmail.com) said:
> > I'm expecting the next beta of Mono to hit the servers today. There are
> > quite a few changes since 1.9.1-2, so please be aware that things may be
> > broken and need rebuilding.
> >
> > Sorry about that. In the words of the good book "Normal service will be
> > resumed just as soon as we know what normal is anyway"
> >
> > Also, please note that as of Mono 2.0, the licence changes to MIT rather
> > that the mix and match that it currently is. This is happening right
> > across the mono family as of version 2 (though probably not for the
> > likes of gtk-sharp2 and gnome-sharp)
>
>
> Rock.. are you planning to push all of this to F8/F9 once it settles down?

I can't imagine breaking the entire ABI and licensing of mono in released
distros is a *good* thing. Especially Fedora 8.

Bill

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

2008/7/18 Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com>:

David Nielsen (gnomeuser@gmail.com) said:

> > I'm expecting the next beta of Mono to hit the servers today. There are

> > quite a few changes since 1.9.1-2, so please be aware that things may be

> > broken and need rebuilding.

> >

> > Sorry about that. In the words of the good book "Normal service will be

> > resumed just as soon as we know what normal is anyway"

> >

> > Also, please note that as of Mono 2.0, the licence changes to MIT rather

> > that the mix and match that it currently is. This is happening right

> > across the mono family as of version 2 (though probably not for the

> > likes of gtk-sharp2 and gnome-sharp)

>

>

> Rock.. are you planning to push all of this to F8/F9 once it settles down?



I can't imagine breaking the entire ABI and licensing of mono in released

distros is a *good* thing. Especially Fedora 8.
If we can manage to push it out as one big update, then I don't see how having the same mono stack, with all the fixes that has gone into Mono 2.0 would be a bad thing.*



--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 22:37 +0200, David Nielsen wrote:


> If we can manage to push it out as one big update, then I don't see
> how having the same mono stack, with all the fixes that has gone into
> Mono 2.0 would be a bad thing.

Cramming major-version updates of default system components into a
stable release is not something to be done lightly. Fedora 10 is only 3
months away; I think this should wait 'til then, unless someone can
convince me it's worth the pain of breaking ABI and rebuilding a whole
mess of packages.

"It's newer!" isn't a very strong argument.

-w

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

18. jul. 2008 22.50 skrev Will Woods <wwoods@redhat.com>:

On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 22:37 +0200, David Nielsen wrote:





> If we can manage to push it out as one big update, then I don't see

> how having the same mono stack, with all the fixes that has gone into

> Mono 2.0 would be a bad thing.



Cramming major-version updates of default system components into a

stable release is not something to be done lightly. Fedora 10 is only 3

months away; I think this should wait 'til then, unless someone can

convince me it's worth the pain of breaking ABI and rebuilding a whole

mess of packages.



"It's newer!" isn't a very strong argument.
Then how about: what we ship right now in F9 is a preview release to this update, having the same Mono throughout our releases is easier to maintain.. this is aside the bugfixes and memory usage/performance enhancements that come with Mono 2.0, all things that will in the end benefit Fedora and our users. Also pushing newer versions of the stack will enable us to support applications more widely across the stack.


It's not like we have no done this before, hell the KDE people AFAIK are doing it right now with KDE 4.1 and the matching QT release (at least if I read their announcement correct, if not forgive me).*


This is naturally all depending on the opinion of the maintainers in question, I merely asked out of interest.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Hi,

> > Rock.. are you planning to push all of this to F8/F9 once it settles down?
>
> I can't imagine breaking the entire ABI and licensing of mono in released
> distros is a *good* thing. Especially Fedora 8.

F9, yes. F8 dunno. It's a hard one to call... I think it will have to
wait quite a while. It may possibly even not happen...

TTFN

Paul
--
Sie können mich aufreizen und wirklich heiß machen!
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

David Nielsen <gnomeuser <at> gmail.com> writes:
> hell the KDE people AFAIK are doing it right now with KDE 4.1 and the
> matching QT release

But Qt 4.4 and KDE 4.1 aren't breaking binary compatibility (except for
libplasma, but there's only one package which isn't part of KDE affected by
this, compiz, and we'll take care of that).

Kevin Kofler

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Hi,

> > If we can manage to push it out as one big update, then I don't see
> > how having the same mono stack, with all the fixes that has gone into
> > Mono 2.0 would be a bad thing.
>
> Cramming major-version updates of default system components into a
> stable release is not something to be done lightly. Fedora 10 is only 3
> months away; I think this should wait 'til then, unless someone can
> convince me it's worth the pain of breaking ABI and rebuilding a whole
> mess of packages.

Until I know the full extent of what will be broken, I certainly won't
be pushing it into F9 and I doubt Xavier will either.

To me, rawhide is there for exactly this purpose - a testing ground to
see how much is broken before pushing to stable.

TTFN

Paul
--
Sie können mich aufreizen und wirklich heiß machen!
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list