FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 09-25-2011, 06:19 PM
Sergio Belkin
 
Default About Feature enhancement Updates Policy

Hi,

I've read the examples about updates allowed and I've read in examples section:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Examples

"Abiword releases a new version that adds compatibility with WordStar
4.0 documents. It also completely updates the user interface to use
pie menus. This would be a feature enhancement with a major user
experience change, and would not be allowed. "

Is that requirement honored? Because unless I miss something there is
a lot of updates that include only enhancements. Is not my will to
create a controversy but perhaps there is something in the guideliness
that needs (at the risk of sounding repeating) update....

And let's say that we have a package foo-5.5 that has libfoo.so 1.0.0
and you make a package 6.0 with library libfoo.so 2.0.0. What should I
do:

a. Submit foo 6.0 as an update
b. Submit foo 6.0 that coexists with foo 5.5
c. Submit foo 6.0 only for rawhide.

What is the right option?

Sorry if I did 2 questions at once.

Thanks in advance

--
--
Sergio Belkin *http://www.sergiobelkin.com
Watch More TV http://sebelk.blogspot.com
LPIC-2 Certified - http://www.lpi.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 09-25-2011, 06:25 PM
Kevin Fenzi
 
Default About Feature enhancement Updates Policy

On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 15:19:45 -0300
Sergio Belkin <sebelk@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've read the examples about updates allowed and I've read in
> examples section:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Examples
>
> "Abiword releases a new version that adds compatibility with WordStar
> 4.0 documents. It also completely updates the user interface to use
> pie menus. This would be a feature enhancement with a major user
> experience change, and would not be allowed. "
>
> Is that requirement honored? Because unless I miss something there is
> a lot of updates that include only enhancements. Is not my will to
> create a controversy but perhaps there is something in the guideliness
> that needs (at the risk of sounding repeating) update....

Perhaps you mean 'enforced' ?

If there is an enhancement update that adds to, but doesn't change the
user experience, thats fine.
>
> And let's say that we have a package foo-5.5 that has libfoo.so 1.0.0
> and you make a package 6.0 with library libfoo.so 2.0.0. What should I
> do:
>
> a. Submit foo 6.0 as an update
> b. Submit foo 6.0 that coexists with foo 5.5
> c. Submit foo 6.0 only for rawhide.
>
> What is the right option?

As with most things in life: It depends.

Very likely the answer is c.

If there's a security bug or serious problem that is solved only in the
new version and can't be easily backported to the existing one you
could push it in stable releases. You should ask for an exception for
that most likely.

Note that if other packages depend on this library, you MUST coordinate
with all consumers of that library to make sure they work with the new
version and push the update at the same time, etc.

b would be an option if there's some reason to keep the old version
around... ie, consumers aren't updating to work with the new version
and won't for a long time. This would also be done in rawhide unless
there was a very good reason not to.

kevin
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 09-26-2011, 02:42 PM
Sergio Belkin
 
Default About Feature enhancement Updates Policy

2011/9/25 Kevin Fenzi <kevin@scrye.com>:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 15:19:45 -0300
> Sergio Belkin <sebelk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've read *the examples about updates allowed and I've read in
>> examples section:
>>
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Examples
>>
>> "Abiword releases a new version that adds compatibility with WordStar
>> 4.0 documents. It also completely updates the user interface to use
>> pie menus. This would be a feature enhancement with a major user
>> experience change, and would not be allowed. "
>>
>> Is that requirement honored? Because unless I miss something there is
>> a lot of updates that include only enhancements. Is not my will to
>> create a controversy but perhaps there is something in the guideliness
>> that needs (at the risk of sounding repeating) update....
>
> Perhaps you mean 'enforced' ?

Yup, I do, I wrote it in a hurry and my english sometimes is not so good

>
> If there is an enhancement update that adds to, but doesn't change the
> user experience, thats fine.
>>
>> And let's say that we have a package foo-5.5 that has libfoo.so 1.0.0
>> and you make a package 6.0 with library libfoo.so 2.0.0. What should I
>> do:
>>
>> a. Submit foo 6.0 as an update
>> b. Submit foo 6.0 that coexists with foo 5.5
>> c. Submit foo 6.0 only for rawhide.
>>
>> What is the right option?
>
> As with most things in life: It depends.
>
> Very likely the answer is c.
>
> If there's a security bug or serious problem that is solved only in the
> new version and can't be easily backported to the existing one you
> could push it in stable releases. You should ask for an exception for
> that most likely.
>
> Note that if other packages depend on this library, you MUST coordinate
> with all consumers of that library to make sure they work with the new
> version and push the update at the same time, etc.
>
> b would be an option if there's some reason to keep the old version
> around... ie, consumers aren't updating to work with the new version
> and won't for a long time. This would also be done in rawhide unless
> there was a very good reason not to.

Thanks for your explanation, it's somewhat better that I can read at wiki

>
> kevin
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>



--
--
Sergio Belkin *http://www.sergiobelkin.com
Watch More TV http://sebelk.blogspot.com
LPIC-2 Certified - http://www.lpi.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 10-05-2011, 09:08 PM
Adam Williamson
 
Default About Feature enhancement Updates Policy

On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 11:42 -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:

> >> "Abiword releases a new version that adds compatibility with WordStar
> >> 4.0 documents. It also completely updates the user interface to use
> >> pie menus. This would be a feature enhancement with a major user
> >> experience change, and would not be allowed. "
> >>
> >> Is that requirement honored? Because unless I miss something there is
> >> a lot of updates that include only enhancements. Is not my will to
> >> create a controversy but perhaps there is something in the guideliness
> >> that needs (at the risk of sounding repeating) update....
> >
> > Perhaps you mean 'enforced' ?
>
> Yup, I do, I wrote it in a hurry and my english sometimes is not so good

> Thanks for your explanation, it's somewhat better that I can read at wiki

Just to make sure something in Kevin's mail is sufficiently emphasized:
the thing that's bad in the Abiword example is not the 'feature
enhancement' part, it's the 'user experience change' part. The WordStar
4.0 compatibility is fine, it's the pie menus that are a problem. An
update which enhances features without changing the normal user
experience is not against the policy.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:54 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org