Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

Zdenek Kabelac zkabelac at redhat.com
Fri Oct 9 14:36:37 UTC 2015


Dne 9.10.2015 v 16:16 Adam Jackson napsal(a):
> On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 13:50 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
>> I agree - the new wording does appear to give in to poor programming
>> practices.
>
> Bundling is _not_ intrinsically poor practice.  Firefox is a good
> example of this, there have been several cases where using the system
> instance of cairo has been a regression relative to the bundled
> version, because firefox relied on the internal details of how a
> particular version of cairo worked, and a newer and ostensibly better
> cairo would break those assumptions.

IMHO  all we need is to support  multiple version of same library
to be installable  -- that's mine point why  usability of Fedora
is miles behind other distros.

Yeah - in ideal world - everyone uses always the latest library
and the library is perfectly compatible.

But in the real-world - version changes, it gets incompatible,
requires some new way how to use it and so on....

So for the real-world  we simply need to be able to keep multiple
version of  e.g.  cairo

until all apps  used by users gets migrated to new version - it's that simple.


And BTW we don't need to go long way example - even core libs like
systemd/udev  tends to break compatibility from time to time.

Thus supporting  multiple lib of same package would have forced developers to 
think about their API instead of rebuilding whole Rawhide every second week 
just because library changes....

This also solve the issue - when some no longer - but still very usable APP is 
missing - because I'd be able to pick  old libs - and downgrade rest of my 
rawhide -  or not having  app at all.

I really think  rules  should reflect real world - and not some kind of 
virtual ideal universe -  it should be a goal - but not with the price any 
Fedora user has to pay ATM...


Zdenek




More information about the devel mailing list