make unmaintained ??

Adam Williamson adamwill at
Sun Oct 25 22:10:17 UTC 2015

On Sun, 2015-10-25 at 19:53 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 01:07:47 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > I built 4.1 for rawhide. If that checks out to be OK, I can push
> > an update for F23 also.
> I do not understand why a major rebase could be permitted after all
> the F-23
> freezing stages?  It may cause FTBFSes or even broken builds.  What
> is then
> all the release engineering good for?  Why not to just run Rawhide
> then?
> This situation may be a FAQ, sorry I do not read every mail here.  I
> did not
> want to be negative/discouraging, just I have seen such FTBFS
> regression(s) in
> Fedora in the past.

Since we're frozen for Final at this point, non-blocker/FE updates
effectively have to respect the 'stable releases' policy, since they
will only go out as updates for F23 Final. That states:

"As a result, we should avoid major updates of packages within a stable
release.  Updates should aim to fix bugs, and not introduce features, 
particularly when those features would materially affect the user or 
developer experience."

"Package maintainers MUST:

 Avoid Major version updates, ABI breakage or API changes if at all
 Avoid changing the user experience if at all possible. 
 Avoid updates that are trivial or don't affect any Fedora users."

There isn't any body tasked with policing this, exactly - no-one whose
job it is to look at every package update and see if it meets the rules
- but if you think an update is inappropriate you can post a comment
and/or contact the package maintainer directly. If you try this and the
maintainer does not agree there's a problem, and you're really
concerned about it, you can escalate to the FPC, I believe.
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net

More information about the devel mailing list