best practices for updates in stable releases (was: Re: OpenOffice 3.1)

[Jesse Keating]

On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 18:41 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 
> What Fedora IMHO needs way more is a written document "best practices
> for updates in stable releases" that people actually follow.
> 
> Right now some packages in Fedora get often updated while others don't.
> That makes no side happy, as those that prefer to get updates to the
> latest version will sometimes miss them (e.g. the OpenOffice case
> discussed here might be such a case) while those that don't want them
> sometimes can't avoid them (e.g. major kernel updates from 2.6.27 to
> 2.6.29 that fix security bugs). That sucks. Chose a side and then try to
> stick to it.
> 
> And sure, the decision when to update or not in the end needs to be done
> by the package maintainers. There always will be special cases where
> updates/not to update is the better decision even if the guidelines say
> something else.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Package_update_guidelines  we have this.  What we don't seem to have is everybody following it.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090509/a8b887e8/attachment.sig>