Amarok 2 on F9

[Yaakov Nemoy]

2008/12/19 Matthew Woehlke <mw_triad at users.sourceforge.net>:
> Joshua C. wrote:
>>
>> I recompiled amarok-2.0.2.fc10 for f9 just to try it. Before this i
>> had to recompile mysql-embedded for f9 (source is in koji for f10)
>> because in f9 there is no mysql-embedded. I also needed to recompile
>> libmtp-0.3.4 for f9. So far it is working fine. Since the kde versions
>> in f10 and  f9 are identical can the maintainer officially publich it
>> for f9?
>
> Why? If we were three months from a release, and talking about the current
> release (i.e. f10), and there was a compelling reason to upgrade (e.g. I
> really hope KDE 4.2 can get pushed to f10 :-) ), that would be one thing. In
> this case, users that want amarok2 can, and IMO should, use f10. I don't see
> the reason to push a major update to a non-current release.

Fedora 9 is a current release.

> (Put another way, would you support pushing OOo3 to f9?)

If the OOo maintainer did not want to support security fixes for two
branches of OOo, then by all means.  If the maintainer decided to
support two branches on two Fedora versions, that might be
questionable, but if he could support both side by side, that would be
much nicer.  Even so, that's really up for the maintainer to decide.

This is the definition of a meritocracy. If this bothers you, you have
several options, most of which petitioning this mailing list isn't
desirable or optimal.  The other thread going around is a perfect
example of why we don't want this.  The phrase "the inmates are
running the asylum" come to mind.

-Yaakov
>
> --
> Matthew
> Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.
> --
> I was recently amused by issuing 'rm -rf $KDEDIR'... from Konsole, while in
> a KDE session. And nothing bad happened whatsoever. Try THAT on Windows :-D.
>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>