Unhelpful update descriptions

[Adam Williamson]

On 11/03/13 06:28 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 06:15:49PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>> At the very least, if you're doing an update for a stable release (so
>> okay, Branched is an exception here), you should have a clear reason
>> for doing it. You're not supposed to bump to the latest upstream
>> release just Because It's There: that's against the update policy.
>> AIUI, in the theoretical situation you describe, the maintainer
>> should not be issuing an update at all.
>
> That's not readily apparent in the Updates Policy:
>
> Package maintainers MUST:
>
> Avoid Major version updates, ABI breakage or API changes if at all possible.
> Avoid changing the user experience if at all possible.
> Avoid updates that are trivial or don't affect any Fedora users.
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#All_other_updates
>
> You could maybe define it as falling under the last of those items but
> someone could argue equally hard for the reverse.  You'd need an actual
> example of an update and what the maintainer was thinking when they pushed
> it to map out the territory.

Ah, you're right, I really should have checked it before posting (yet 
again). I was thinking that it discouraged *all* version updates, not 
just "major" ones. I personally would still be hesitant to update a 
package to a new upstream version if I didn't know what the heck was in 
it, but that is indeed apparently just a personal preference and not a 
policy :)
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net