Package update policy

[Erik van Pienbroek]

Hi all,

As F-11 is approaching we're getting to deal with multiple branches
(F-10, F-11 and devel). I've noticed that several packages have
different versions across branches. For most packages this isn't a
problem, but for some core-packages this causes issues.

One of such packages is mingw32-filesystem. This package contains
several RPM macros which are used to build packages. I've noticed that
some fixes have been backported from the F-11 to the F-10 branch while
others haven't. This can cause confusion among packagers as they have to
keep track of the changes in each individual branch to get the
'BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem > XX' right.

A solution to this situation would be to keep the mingw32-filesystem
package in sync on all branches, but I think it's best if we create a
more general 'Package update policy' so that it's clear for all
packagers what package versions can be expected among the different
branches.

For this policy I'm thinking about dividing all the mingw32 packages in
separate groups:

1. Core packages with no native version in Fedora
2. Packages with a native version in Fedora
3. Packages with no native version in Fedora

Packages belonging to the first group are:
- mingw32-filesystem
- mingw32-runtime
- mingw32-w32api

What I would like to propose is:
- Packages in group 1 are always in sync among the different branches
  (there may be a small delay to test changes, but eventually the
   changes should to applied to all branches)
- Packages in group 2 are always in sync with the native version
  of each branch
- The update policy of packages in group 3 is fully up to the maintainer

Any comments?

Regards,

Erik van Pienbroek