On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 11:13 -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote: > Jeremy Katz wrote: > >> 3 is the only one that is guaranteed to ship a stable product without > >> causing a delay. 1 can also ship stable product without a delay, but > >> only if you know you can assign someone to do the work in a finite > >> timeframe. If 1 becomes "hope someone patches the feature" then 1 can > >> mean delay. 4 almost invariably means delay. > > > > When we're talking about the kernel, though, 3 _isn't_ guaranteed to be > > a stable product ;) If you go back to a previous kernel release, then > > perhaps you've just lost all the security improvements. Or lost the > > ability to support hardware that's been released in the intervening six > > months since Fn-1. > > Right, which is why most large pieces of software have a stable and > unstable branch... > > You could always have a "special kernel exception" - better to have one > package that can screw you, instead of hundreds... > What are the packages that cause slips? We've had a couple of slips on almost every release, right? What are the causes? -sv _______________________________________________ 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
