On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:37:44 -0400
Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger(a)gmail.com> wrote:
For (unreleased) F14, I think that the arugment that future work on
the package is better off starting with something that works than to
start off with something that's broken by new gcc, boost, etc is very
valid.
Sure. I would suggest fixing the issue and even commiting the fixed
spec, but I don't know that it's worth pushing an update out for.
If I get a time-sensitive security bug about foo in Fedora 14, I want
to have as few extraneous issues as possible so I can hunt down and
fix the bug quickly.
Yep. Also, if someone wants to build your package and fix something or
test something it's nice to have the fixed version sitting there ready
in git.
In released Fedora's that argument starts to lose weight because
the
window in which a bug that *must* be fixed could be discovered goes
down (ie: F12 only has a few more months of life so there's a much
smaller time period in which a must-fix bug could be discovered.
(OTOH, fxing FTBFS in a just released Fedora is probably still a good
reason to update.)
I suppose, but it seems like it's just wasting our users time unless it
fixes something that the user would see. If it's just fixing a build
issue, but the program is the exact same version and behavior, didn't
we just waste resources pushing it out to the user?
kevin