downgrade version of gthumb in fedora 21 final?

[Michael Catanzaro]

On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 08:52 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> No? We push unstable GNOME to rawhide all the time; or is this more of
> a case where we're worrying that a stable gthumb won't be available
> before F22 is due?

Exactly; since that's what happened for F21, there's a reasonable chance
it will happen in the future as well, if not for F22 (which seems quite
possible), maybe F23. With most of GNOME, we know when the next stable
release will be, and there's no harm in pushing unstable versions so
that they get testing. That's not the case with gthumb. I'm confused why
they're not following the GNOME release cycle, but that's their choice,
and the reasonable consequence is that they get less testing in rawhide
so we don't have to gamble on whether or not we'll need to do a
downgrade and +epoch or choose to leave it unstable.

(In this case, the revert is clearly the correct choice as upstream has
said we should not ship 3.3. Anyway, this vindicates the WG's choice to
stick with Shotwell for the time being, as gthumb 3.2 really is a huge
downgrade....)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20141107/01b987d8/attachment.sig>