pushing updates for FTBFS
kevin at scrye.com
Wed Sep 22 18:38:50 UTC 2010
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:37:44 -0400
Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at 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
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 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?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100922/72ce348e/attachment.bin
More information about the devel