yum flavors vs/ fc1, fc2, fc3...infinity

[Jeff Ratliff]

On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 05:02:20AM +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> 
> 
> >> "Sufficiently well tested" means
> >> "tested on a sufficiently wide range of machines".
> > ----
> > Your statement presumes that it wasn't tested on a sufficiently wide
> > range of machines. The facts you are using to base this presumption are
> > anecdotal.
> 
> Do you have actual figures then to support your contrary view?

I wouldn't consider this a contrary view at all (unless you mean
contrary to your view). 

I'm sure the developers would have liked to test on a wider range
of machines, but testing is voluntary. You have yet to propose a 
solution to this problem. There is no way to force people to test
if they don't want to. It's certianly in the best interests of 
everyone to invest resources in testing if they want their problems
solved, but convincing people of that will not be accomplished by
bashing Fedora's release strategy. 

I think Fedora is high quality. It works well for me on 3 machines
(and currently 2 test installs), and it works well for a lot of 
people. As has been pointed out (many, many times) the 2.6 kernel
was the source of a lot of FC2 problems. I think as people get over
their fear, more people will get involved and quality will only
increase (until the deluge of crying and hand-wringing when the
2.8 kernel is released, of course).  

Add me to the list of people who think Fedora is doing the right 
thing (for me, if not for everyone).