no ... *really* ... any ETA for updated beta?

Panu Matilainen pmatilai at welho.com
Wed Aug 27 17:33:26 UTC 2003


Quoting "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday at mindspring.com>:

> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Alan Cox wrote:
> 
> > The answer is "When its ready", and part of the "its ready" is making
> > sure we can avoid getting into the same situation again
> 
> as i already mentioned, that would normally be a reasonable response
> if *red hat* had not already suggested a date for the next beta, as i
> recall.  but there's another reason why the "when it's ready" answer
> is kind of irrelevant.
> 
> we're not talking about an official release here.  we're talking about
> a *beta*, which we as beta testers *expect* to have flaws, glitches and
> bugs.  so what does it even mean to say that a beta is "ready" anyway?
> 
> from the timestamps on one of the download mirrors, it seems that this
> beta has been out for about five weeks now.  i don't think it's 
> unreasonable to think that there have been enough bug reports and
> fixes to let the beta testers have a crack at an improved version.
> 
> no one expects it to be perfect.  but it would be nice to have a crack
> at a newer release that we *should* expect to have fewer bugs so we can
> start the testing process over again and push it along even further.
> 
> i mean, really.  it *is* just a beta.

I think Alan means something entirely different. The *software* is out there in 
the form of rawhide - what do you expect the beta to have if not that stuff? 
The way I read Alan's comment is that the initial announcement raised incorrect 
assumptions/legal issues/whatever and they want to get that kind of stuff right 
before "relaunching."


-- 
    - Panu -





More information about the fedora-test-list mailing list