Florian La Roche schrieb:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 10:32:05AM -0400, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote:
From what I've heard many Fedora users changed over to not automatically
install updates, but rather do that e.g. every 4 weeks only.
(The balance between a developer-oriented and a bigger user base will
always stay a problem area.)
and somewhere else in this thread:
Tom "spot" Callaway schrieb:
> I continue to stand firm that its not updates-testing.repo that is
> needed, but "updates testers".
Sometimes I'm wondering if we should have two totally separate update
channels/repos for Fedora releases:
- one similar maintained then the current updates, with a slightly more
bold approach (for example it could include a Firefox2 update for FC6)
- one more traditional, careful maintained update repo where only stuff
that fixes security problem/real bugs got pushed to that got tested a
bit in the other repo first; the firefox2 update for example would never
get build for this repo and only be available in the other.
Then users could choose which of those tow they want. RHEL5/CentOS would
still exist on one end for being even more careful and longer supported
and rawhide on the other end for even more experimental stuff.
But well, that would be a lot of work to maintain -- probably to much to
realize it ATM. Maybe in one or two years from now, when the Core and
Extras merge is done and we have lots of maintainers per package that
would need to support such a idea.
CU
thl
P.S.: Yes, that's more a general thought and does not solve the "updates
don't work due to missing deps" problem at hand.
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
