Tomboy for FC6 not being updated... why?

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le Ven 13 juillet 2007 09:50, Rahul Sundaram a écrit :
> Not to
> harp on KDE SIG but it does seem that we don't value robustness as
> much
> as we should for updates in general and that is worrisome to me as I
> rely on Fedora everyday as a end user to get work done.

There is a worrying tendency to systematically push updates to every
Fedora version under the sun. Fedora-devel is supposed to get this
stuff and spend a few months stabilizing it before the next Fedora
release. Users that want the latest and greatest should use devel.
Users that want regular releases + some bleeding-edge enhancements
should selectively install rawhide packages. Users that just want to
use stable Fedora releases without worrying about compatibility
breakage between release bumps should be entitled to configure
stable+updates without needing any dangerous update filtering.

The argument is always "but if I'm the only one doing this I'm not
destabilising Fedora too much, and the result is less user-hostile
than Devel". It's basic premise is wrong - why should other packagers
restrict themselves just so some can go update-happy safely? And if
they don't restrict themselves, how stable is the result going to be?

If users are not getting new versions fast enough the Fedora cycle
needs to be shortened, not bypassed. If it's not possible to shorten
the cycle while preserving stability, how is delivering rawhide bits
piecemeal without any devel staging is going to be any more stable and
user-friendly?

Fedora is merged now. Cycle length is in the community's hand. There's
no need to workaround a RedHat-controlled cycle length like in the
Fedora Core  + Third party repositories days. If needs be we can add
RHEL-like in-cycle coordinated (& tested) minor release pushes.
Anything that strengths the "RHEL alpha" perception that turns out
vast numbers of potential users is bad for the project.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot