From Fedora Project Wiki

No edit summary
Line 4: Line 4:


{{admon/note||Re-add the definitions and examples of these that mediawiki deleted}}
{{admon/note||Re-add the definitions and examples of these that mediawiki deleted}}
These are the update styles that people have expressed as wanting.


* Rolling
* Rolling
* Semi-rolling
* Semi-rolling
* QA'd
* QA'd -- This is a large category that we may want to break into further subdivisions.  It includes forcing updates to go through updates-testing first, forcing updates through low risk
* Critical bugfix-only
* Critical bugfix-only
=== Additional Considerations ===
{{admon/note||Add additional considerations here}}
== Present lifecycle ==
* Rawhide
* Alpha
* Beta


== Proposals ==
== Proposals ==

Revision as of 21:35, 27 February 2010

This page is a start at defining expectations for updating packages within the release. It's current aim is to document what people want, what we have now, and making proposals in how to change what we have now to satisfy more people more of the time.

Update styles

Re-add the definitions and examples of these that mediawiki deleted

These are the update styles that people have expressed as wanting.

  • Rolling
  • Semi-rolling
  • QA'd -- This is a large category that we may want to break into further subdivisions. It includes forcing updates to go through updates-testing first, forcing updates through low risk
  • Critical bugfix-only

Additional Considerations

Add additional considerations here

Present lifecycle

  • Rawhide
  • Alpha
  • Beta

Proposals

Because that comes with some types of disruptive changes which we do not
perform in releases and which I do not advocate performing in releases.
Rolling releases like Rawhide, Debian unstable, Gentoo etc. have no set
points to do disruptive changes. So e.g. you wake up in the morning and your
system no longer boots because your kernel upgrade from yesterday enabled
libata and you had hd* hardcoded in some place. (Yes, I know that particular
change is now a done deal, but there will definitely be similar changes in
the future.)

As I have explained several times, AIUI, a stable release MUST NOT get
upgrades which "break things", e.g.:
* require manual adjustment to config files, databases etc.,
* break support for existing user data (documents, configuration, savegames
etc.),
* knowingly introduce regressions,
* remove features,
* radically change the UI (but I don't think minor changes like a menu entry
moving to a different place are a serious issue),
* bump the soname of a core library on which dozens of packages depend (but
I don't personally see a grouped update with a soname change and a rebuild
of ALL packages using that library as a problem as long as it's only for a
few packages),
* change the API of a library in a way that existing applications using it
fail to rebuild and cannot easily be fixed (in fact soname bumps MUST be
accompanied by rebuilds of everything affected)
etc. (and I think we all agree there. But that's why Rawhide is not the
answer!), but IMHO (and there opinions differ), it SHOULD get upgrades
which:
* fix bugs, even if they're not critical or security,
* introduce features in a non-disruptive, backwards-compatible way (e.g.
there's now a new menu entry which does something cool, at worst that new
menu entry might not work perfectly, but it shouldn't affect anything else).