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

Vít Ondruch vondruch at redhat.com
Mon Oct 12 09:52:47 UTC 2015


Dne 10.10.2015 v 02:50 Kevin Kofler napsal(a):
> Chris Adams wrote:
>> Is that short-sighted?  IMHO yes.  Can Fedora fix that?  Doubtful.
>> There are three choices:
>>
>> - Fedora attempts to patch in a stable(-enough) ABI, build shared
>>   libraries, and unbundle all consumers of said libraries.  This is a
>>   large (and growing) amount of work, and there is not necessarily
>>   sufficient volunteer time to make it practical going forward.
>>
>> - Fedora excludes all such software, reducing the usefulness and
>>   relevance of Fedora to a growing number of users.
>>
>> - Fedora pushes upstreams for stable ABIs and unbundling, but recognizes
>>   the "real world" upstreams are creating, and the demands of many users
>>   who just want to have a desktop with the stuff they want to click, and
>>   so allows bundling where there's no practical alternative.
> You are missing the fourth choice: We simply push ABI-changing updates of 
> the library as grouped updates with all dependent packages

and we ignore the rest of the world who could build something useful on
the top of the Fedora.

Vít


>  This works fine 
> as long as the library is not used by too many packages and the ABI changes 
> are not so major as to require nontrivial porting. We have already done this 
> in practice many times, for several packages. For example, exiv2 updates are 
> done in such a coordinated way (usually by Rex Dieter).
>
>         Kevin Kofler
>



More information about the devel mailing list