Upgrading libpng: shall we move to 1.4.x or 1.5.x?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 14:54:28 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl at redhat.com> wrote:

> Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com> writes:
> > Some quick questions: 
> 
> > Whats upstreams schedule like? How long will 1.4 and 1.5 continue
> > to be supported, and when do they plan on a 1.6?
> 
> 1.4 will be supported for a long time, though presumably not as long
> as 1.5.  I don't think there are any active plans for an incompatible
> 1.6 at all.

ok. 

> My own agenda though is that I'd like Fedora to be on 1.5 in the next
> release or two, so that Red Hat isn't in a position of still needing
> support for 1.4 eight or ten years from now due to it being in future
> RHEL branches.

Yeah. 

I'd say we either move to 1.5 now and try and get it done by f17, or
move to 1.4 now and drop 1.5 in rawhide right after the f17 branch for
f18. 

> > Is there possibly a way to switch to 1.4, but warn (buildtime) about
> > this going away soon, etc? 
> 
> Well, 1.4 does put __attribute__((__deprecated__)) labels on all the
> png_info struct fields.  (They're actually there in the 1.2 headers
> as well, but not enabled by default.)  However, how many Fedora
> maintainers worry about fixing mere compiler warnings?  I know I can't
> claim to spend any time on that, except with my upstream hat on.

Yeah, true. Unless it caused a fatal error, many people wouldn't
notice. ;( 

kevin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20111104/b2331688/attachment.bin