Changing kernel API / Breaking VirtualBox - update criteria violation?

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 08:28:30PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:09:26PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 07:53:12PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > 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.
> 
> If you interpret "The ABI" as "Any property of the binary that another 
> package could conceivably depend on" then your position makes sense. But 
> since nobody would interpret it that way, the obvious conclusion is that 
> "The ABI" means "The supported ABI". Attempting to codify this more 
> precisely would just encourage language lawyering, which is exactly what 
> we were trying to avoid when we generated this policy. Use common sense.
> 
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-November/159819.html

-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/20111122/77f531cc/attachment.bin