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

Re: More Fedora mock breakage

"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange redhat com> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 08:41:17PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 06:48:54PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> [ consults CVS... ]  So XZ support in F-11's rpm is less than a week
>>> old, there is *no* support in F-10, and we're already requiring
>>> the capability in order to do useful development work?

>>> All I can say is WTF.

>> Did you have a better plan for migrating to an XZ payload for F12 in time
>> for Alpha?

> IMHO there should be a much larger window between providing an new 
> feature in RPM, and requiring it for development. eg, new features
> should go into RPM in rawhide & F11 at least 2-3 months before we 
> require them. Yes this would have required XZ support to be merged 
> much sooner in the F12 schedule, or alternatively merge XZ support
> in F12, but don't use it till F13. 

I would be satisfied if there was any window at all.  The upthread
suggestions that it's okay to expect every individual Fedora packager
to cope with this for themselves were insane, not to say insulting.
I have real work to do, and dealing with that sort of make-work is
not it.

			regards, tom lane

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