Changing kernel API / Breaking VirtualBox - update criteria violation?

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 07:53:12PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:44:59AM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 06:57:30PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > This case requires no clarification.
> > > 
> > The fact that you and I are continuing to argue about this despite the fact
> > that we agree on the desired outcome would suggest otherwise.
> 
> No. You're simply interpreting things incorrectly.
> 
*sigh*  You miss the point.  I'm perfectly willing to be interpreting it
incorrectly.  The problem is that the wording allows me to interpret in
incorrectly.  I have gone through the policy and quoted you the sections
that I'm reading to support my interpretation.

That does not mean that the intention of the policy needs to be changed.  It
*does* mean that the wording of the policy should be changed so that it's
less likely for people to interpret it in the manner that I've interpreted
it here.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20111122/3253be87/attachment.bin