-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tom Yates wrote: > On Mon, 15 May 2006, James Kosin wrote: > >> I agree with Jesse here; but, I would like to add that the >> packages should be tested on the released platform by someone and >> not just released in this case. SendMail was a recent blunder of >> sorts because of this. > > not to start any kind of flame war, but just for accuracy's sake, > the recent sendmail release *was* tested before public release - i > was one of the testers who signed off on it. in my case, the test > didn't show up anything because i *always* reroll my sendmail.cf > from m4 by hand, any time i upgrade sendmail (as my test report > stated); and i don't use SMTP AUTH. > > that may say that our required testing is insufficient; i wouldn't > presume to comment on that. but i don't believe sendmail was > rushed out the door any more untested than any other package would > have been. > > Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't trying to start anything, only that many things that shouldn't have been broken got broken by this release. Which has been the only major upgrade of software apart from the security patches. - -James -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEaz9JkNLDmnu1kSkRAnH/AJ4mS40qSnVnxndoRxz8MiPKyzv7DQCfdXnA YSktDPJLUObN7/ZyQKwVh08= =SbzY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Scanned by ClamAV - http://www.clamav.net -- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
