'outdated' packages in rawhide

[Arkadiusz Miskiewicz]

Dnia Saturday 13 of March 2004 15:40, Mike A. Harris napisał:
> Developer time is developer time though, wether it is being spend
> developing on RHEL, or time spent developing on Fedora Core.
>
> Updating a package to a new version does not come at zero
> developer time cost.  Depending on the particular package, the
> changes it includes, and how those changes might affect other
> packages in the distribution or dependancies need to be
> investigated closely.  It may also require upgrading other things
> too that other package owners maintain, which might continue in a
> domino effect across the distribution depending on the package.
So what's the status of opening cvs/svn/whatever for people ro + rw for 
experienced contributors? This works quite well - PLD is for example 
developed in this style (but in contrast to Fedora there are no people who 
are paid for working on PLD). 

There are people who have plenty of time and could do such job for free.

> You either then ship buggier but newer
> bits, or downgrade back to the old version and irritate a lot of
> people due to yum/up2date/apt not liking the package downgrade.
Or perhaps because you don't use Epoch while you should.

> It is a gentle balancing game.  That said, I think all of my
> packages are up to date except for XFree86, but we know the
> answer there.  ;o)
License issues? From what I know openssl has more restrictive license than 
XFree86 (there was a guy on 7thguard.net who compared these).

> Mike A. Harris     ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris
> OS Systems Engineer - XFree86 maintainer - Red Hat

-- 
Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz     CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology
arekm.pld-linux.org, 1024/3DB19BBD, JID: arekm.jabber.org, PLD/Linux