I do tend to think we should try and not release broken packages. That is something that annoys lots (myself included) when RedHat releases a package that breaks something critical (such as process accounting). I would propose the following: after two PUBLISHes, the package goes to updates-testing as current If this is a critical hole (say, a remote exploit), we immediately release the package to updates If the hole is not as critical, then we go through the normal QA process. Two VERIFYs are after some period of time (say one week) with no objections, the package goes to updates On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 06:18:31PM +0200, Andres Adrover Kvamsdal wrote: > >>squirrelmail - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1733 > >>Needs 2 VERIFY before release (also double check no new issues have > >>cropped up) > > This is the main problem I see with Fedora Legacy. "double check no new > issues have cropped up" As I see it Fedora Legacy should release ASAP. > Remember that redhat has released several broken packages. They fixed > that releasing improved packages some few days later. > > I do not understand why Fedora Legacy has to be better than RedHat. > > Andres > > > -- > > fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list -- ******************************** David William Botsch Consultant/Advisor II CCMR Computing Facility dwb7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ******************************** -- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
