[sword-devel] Xiphos crashes

[Matěj Cepl]

On Wed, 2014-06-11 at 10:27 -0400, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> As Greg and I have chatted in IRC, the perspective he's offered is that
> building for older releases is for bug and security vulnerabilities.  I
> disagree with this, but if that's Policy, I don't have a lot of say. 
> Obviously there are bug fixes in each release, and I would think that
> justifies building for all currently-supported releases.  That's why I
> built Sword and Xiphos packages last evening for F19, which I've now
> been told work fine on F20, too.

OK, Greg is the official maintainer so it is his decision how he wants
to maintain the package. I would just say that this policy is not
followed even for most desktop end-user packages. Just looking into our
internal build system and we have firefox-24.6.0-1.el5_10 (and planning
31, when it will be ESR). That's for RHEL-5 which is otherwise closed
for anything else than grave bugs.

The problem with desktop programs is that they are getting much sooner
obsolete than the “server” packages. We could have
coreutils-5.97-34.el5_8.1 (if I am not mistaken, this is the last RHEL-5
version) and kernel 2.6.8, while we have 8.22 and 3.10.0 in the
yesterday released RHEL-7, and nobody cares. When there were obsolete
versions of Firefox (mozilla 0.9 in RHEL-2 as far as I remember, and I
believe Firefox 2 in RHEL-5) we heard complaints of our customers loud
and clear.

However, as I have said, it’s Greg’s call to make.

Best,

Matěj

-- 
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/, Jabber: mcepl<at>ceplovi.cz
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB  25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
 
See, when the GOVERNMENT spends money, it creates jobs; whereas
when the money is left in the hands of TAXPAYERS, God only knows
what they do with it. Bake it into pies, probably. Anything to
avoid creating jobs.
    -- Dave Barry