Ready for new RPM version?

[Toshio Kuratomi]

John Reiser wrote:
> Bill Nottingham wrote:
>> Panu Matilainen (pmatilai at laiskiainen.org) said: 
>>> So, should I bother with a RPM 4.7 feature page or not?
> 
>> - does it change the output package format in any way that would
>>   make packages unreadable by prior versions?
> 
> If the output package format is not 100% usable by previous versions of rpm
> (all the way back to the rpm that was in the original Fedora 9 release)
> then such a change is forbidden without explicit migration and
> compatibility features. 

This seems a little too strict to me when taken with the fact that we've
already broken output package format between rawhide and F10-GA's rpm.
The bar for doing that might not have been placed correctly but I think
it's unreasonable to say 4.7 can't get in if it is no more incompatible
than that decision.

Unless explicit migration and compatibility features encompass the
requirements and limitations placed on the larger hash feature (such as,
you must go from F-9 to F-10 in order to use preupgrade, etc).

-Toshio

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090226/5336b161/attachment.sig>