Package version match with upstream in reviewing

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 06/03/2013 02:33 PM, Kalpa Welivitigoda wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Matej Cepl <mcepl at redhat.com
> <mailto:mcepl at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 2013-06-03, 12:19 GMT, Kalpa Welivitigoda wrote:
>      > It is compulsory that a package waiting to be reviewed, be submitted
>      > with the latest version in upstream?
>
>     Could you elaborate a bit on the particular situation? Why wouldn't you
>     go with the latest upstream?
>
>
> It's always better to go with the latest version unless in an
> exceptional case.

In this generality, it's untrue. Apply common sense to decide what to do.

> I just wanted to know whether it is a MUST since it is
> not clearly elaborated in the Package Review Guideline [1]
Definitely not. As others already expressed it's a "SHOULD".

It's common sense to find a compromise between what an upstream claims 
to be "stable", what users expect and own experience with a package.

Blindly packaging up some unstable, API/UI-breaking an 
overzealous/hyper-active "stuff" doesn't help anybody.

Ralf