[fab] Fw: [Bug 174307] RPM 4.4.6 is available

[Jesse Keating]

On Sunday 09 July 2006 15:49, Michael Tiemann wrote:
> I think there are two separate problems.  The first, which may well be a
> fait accompli, is "which version of rpm should be in fc6?"  The second,
> which concerns me greatly, is "how/why the heck did we act/not act so
> that we'd have no choice in this matter for fc6?"

Really there are two issues.

1) Are we going to use the latest upstream rpm version?

2) Are we going to continue using upstream rpm at all?

#1 is pretty easy to answer from a technical POV.  The goals we've had for FC5 
and FC6 are of a nature that would not mesh well with a new major version of 
RPM which includes some pretty major changes.  Add to the mix a release of 
RHEL being based nearly completely on what we do in FC6, overhauling rpm 
itself was just way too daunting of a task.  We just don't have the resources 
for that kind of thing amidst all the other things we're trying to accomplish 
for FC6/RHEL5.  This decision was pretty much made by the major players 
involved.  The Red Hat rpm maintainer, the technical lead for Fedora, the 
technical team around RHEL, and in part the release engineering folks (as we 
play with rpm to!)

#2 is a far more complicated question, one that SHOULD involve the board and 
the community, and is noted to be on the boards plate.

Should we make an 'official' statement with regard to RPM for FC6?  Maybe.  
We've pretty much done so given that next week is the feature freeze and 
we've not put a new rpm in rawhide.  I'm not the person to make such an 
announcement though.  I'll leave that up to whomever.

How we got to this point was the goals we had in mind for this release and 
last.  They were incompatible with a major change to RPM.  Plain and simple.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20060709/16d9da64/attachment.bin