new RPM version and Feature process (was: Re: Heads-up: brand new RPM version about to hit rawhide)
Josh Boyer
jwboyer at gmail.com
Wed Jul 9 19:43:44 UTC 2008
On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 11:26 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'll argue that not every package upgrade is worth a Feature
> > designation. But the major ones should be. Firefox 3 had one. I
> > believe OpenOffice.org should have one. For a major rpm upgrade, there
> > should be one as well.
>
> Distill that feeling into a generally applicable statement that
> package maintainers can use as a conditional test as to whether or not
> they should file a feature.
Simplistic start of a checklist:
1) Is your package included in the default install of one of the main
spins?
2) Is your package _the_ default application of it's type?
3) Is your package involved in the building of the entire distro? (E.g.
rpm, gcc, glibc)
4) Are there a large number of packages that depend on your package that
will be effected by an upgrade/change/etc ?
5) Are you trying to promote this package as a Feature for publicity
reasons?
6) Does your package enable something that is highly end-user visible
(e.g. magically working wireless, push button pony making)
If yes to any of the above, please create a Feature page. If no, and
or/you are still unsure, ask one of your FESCo representatives and they
will guide you.
josh
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list