On Sunday, February 13, 2011 15:16:58 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Il giorno dom, 13/02/2011 alle 14.22 -0500, Mike Frysinger ha scritto:
> > thus it's a lot more sane in the long term to assume that packages
> > support the latest rather than patching everyone (and being forced to
> > carry those c
On Friday, February 11, 2011 11:49:43 Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 02/11/2011 06:38 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> > 4) What have we learned from libpng 1.2 -> 1.4 upgrade? I'd just like to
> > be better informed.
>
> One way under consideration:
>
> We have been discussing about removing libpng
On Friday, February 11, 2011 01:49:43 PM Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > 4) What have we learned from libpng 1.2 -> 1.4 upgrade? I'd just like to
> > be better informed.
>
> One way under consideration:
>
> We have been discussing about removing libpng.pc, libpng.so and
> unversioned headers from the
On 02/11/2011 05:38 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> To ensure good upgrade experience for our users, and learning some
> lessons from previous, um... "disruptive" upgrade (1.2 -> 1.4), I'd have
> some questions:
FWIW: For that upgrade I've not used lafile-fixer or anything like that
on my stable
On 02/11/2011 06:38 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> I'm not a member of QA team or libpng maintainer, but hopefully I'm not
> going to write something horribly wrong here.
>
> To ensure good upgrade experience for our users, and learning some
> lessons from previous, um... "disruptive" upgrade (1
