Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 09:29 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> I consider ABI compatibility as just one part
> of what defines a stable distro, but, imo, there are certainly cases
> where breaking ABI is justified (for essential features, bug fixes, and
> yes, stability sometimes).
Please ask RH how they have been handling Core, so far.
I don't know how many times I've been told: "No API-changes, no ABI
upgrade, no feature upgrades, often not even bugfixes (aka
FIXEDRAWHIDE)"!
When it comes to breaking API/ABI, I'd say it's primarily the package
maintainers' call to make. You just experienced cases where they chose
not to upgrade, which isn't contrary at all to what I described.
-- Rex