On Wednesday 13 December 2006 10:04, seth vidal wrote: > Does that sum up a lot of what happens when fedora slips a release? Yes. Its a very damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. If you fork, you're damned to maintain your fork for N period of time, which nobody wants to do, plus you're damned because you didn't ship the latest version of Foo and the community hates you for it, and you're holding software hostage, and blah blah blah. However, if you just ship latest version of Foo, well then you're damned because you don't care about end users and you're holding software hostage, and blah blah blah. If we slip and try to put pressure on getting things fixed upstream, or at least a patch that is acceptable upstream even if they don't release with it yet, then we are still shipping close to or the latest of Foo, _and_ it maybe even works, plus we know our patch is going upstream so that we don't have to maintain our own fork for N period of time. But then we suck because we delayed the release and we're holding software hostage, and blah blah blah. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgprh9Pb51nvn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
