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