Backporting LLVM 3.1 for Fedora 17

[Kalev Lember]

On 11/16/2012 10:13 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> Sending this to the relevant package owners as well as the development
> list - if there's too much pushback, I'll look at backporting the
> patches instead, though given that LLVM 3.2 is scheduled for release
> next month, if we agree, going forward, that occasional stack rebuilds
> are acceptable, it would really lower the maintenance burden, instead
> of having to support 3 LLVM releases.

I am a strong believer that new features should only be introduced in
new Fedora releases. This is why we have releases after all: so that
people could choose when they get new features. If they want
stability [1], they can choose not to upgrade; if they want new features
(new LLVM/Clang, new Mesa), they upgrade to a new Fedora release [2].

We even have an official guideline that states:

 "Releases of the Fedora distribution are like releases of the
  individual packages that compose it. A major version number reflects
  a more-or-less stable set of features and functionality. As a
  result, we should avoid major updates of packages within a stable
  release. Updates should aim to fix bugs, and not introduce features
  /.../" [3]


[1] Of course, this only works if we we manage to get Fedora releases
    out in time, not slipping for months like with F18.
[2] With "stable" here I mean "not subject to change". A stable
    platform is something that does not change.
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy

-- 
Kalev