> I would assume not if we stick to the "GA tree" but more to the point > why exactly does the installation image have to be made from the tree > it's composing from? For a long time I also thought that anaconda should be on its own development schedule and Fedora downstream should just use the latest stable release rather than the current "CI" (cough) approach. But hearing some of the voices here I see that it may not be quite that simple. The problem with "basing the installer on the current stable release" is then what to do with Live images... > > To adjust for this would imply moving the freezes, deadlines and > > development for a very large chunk of other things earlier as well. Hmm perhaps - I still feel it would be worth trying and might make the Installer teams' lives less stressful too. :) Conversely how bleeding edge does the installer have to be for a Fedora release? > If you got any suggestions on how we in QA are supposed to be able to > cover 3 products I'll gladly hear them. I admit this is also my largest concern with the multi-product proposal: how to make the QA scale? Jens _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
