[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: perl package split - if you maintain a perl-* module, read this message.

On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 12:00:52PM -0400, Robin Norwood wrote:
> Well, the buildroots currently have 'perl-devel' because we made 'perl'
> Require 'perl-devel' - which is obviously wrong for the long term, but
> in the short term fixed the builds.  What we're doing now is further
> splitting things out so there will be more packages, *and* removing the
> Requires.  There's been some further discussion on
> fedora-perl-devel-list about this, and the alternative is to *not* add
> the new packages to the buildroots, and just have people fix their
> packages.  Not to be a total weathervane here, but personally I'd just
> as soon not add the packages to the buildroots, and fix the broken
> packages now.  I just don't feel like I have enough of a feel for which
> option people will prefer to make a call.  So, if you have an opinion,
> speak up now.

How many packages will break?  How quickly can they be fixed?  F7
test4 is frozen, meaning critial bug fixes only.  It's no more broken
than it has been in the past, right?  So the penalty for not fixing it
for F7 is small, right?  And the benefit for F7 is small (cleanliness
of the BRs being the main benefit).

If the number of packages is small and people can fix them in the next
couple days, perhaps an exception will be made.  Otherwise, the fixing
should start as soon as rawhide begins for F8, IMHO.


Matt Domsch
Software Architect
Dell Linux Solutions linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux
Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]