[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: further package removals/potential package removals



On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 18:11:08 +0100, Féliciano Matias wrote:

> Le lundi 24 janvier 2005 à 17:30 +0100, Michael Schwendt a écrit :
> > At fedora.us we
> > have the stable/testing/unstable classification
> 
> Fedora Core don't have such "stable/testing/unstable classification" and
> I think it's a good thing.

Sorry that you disagree, but as someone who has reviewed and approved
several hundreds of packages at fedora.us, it is my opinion that the
classification (at least the split into stable+testing) has been
beneficial. Also at rpm.livna.org it permitted test-driving new
releases publicly while not disturbing known good releases. It
utilises existing community resources, who are interested in
contributing community QA, while other parts of the community prefer
not to play with fire.

Without such a classification, what is accepted into Fedora Extras
and when?

Fedora Core has an early development stream and multiple test releases.

Some of this will likely be discussed at FUDCon. But currently, once a
newly added package is added to pre-extras, it's included by
definition, and we must deal with the wreckage if there are bug
reports and/or complaints.

> Debian have this "feature" I am not convinced it's very useful.

That's quite a different one.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]