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

Re: 182 pending F11 stable updates. WTF?





On Fri, 8 May 2009, Mark McLoughlin wrote:

On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 08:50 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 13:31 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 22:09 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 10:41:37AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
How is it we have 182 stable updates pending for F11 already?  How have
these seen any testing by a wider audience?  Are we really just not
bothering with updates-testing anymore?  Do we not care about distro
stability?

I'll tell you the three reasons I'm pushing stuff directly to stable:

(1) New package.

(2) Update to a new package that I know not many people are using.

This (2) is something we should try and figure out, IMHO. Trying to
apply the same rules and guidelines to 8k+ packages doesn't work.

There is a large set of packages which always should spend some time in
updates-testing, but there's an even larger set of packages which it
probably doesn't help at all. The same goes for the pre-GA development
freeze.

Fedora Core vs Fedora Extras ...

Your point?

That because we've merged Core and Extras we should never differentiate
between packages based on "coreness" for anything ever again?


I think we shouldn't differentiate on 'coreness' b/c of how arbitrary that distinction is.

-sv


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