On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 03:00:39 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > Wrong. > > > > Somebody decided _THEY_ wanted it, because _THEY_ think this bureaucracy > > is necessary and _THEY_ proceeded with it, because _THEY_ had the powers > > to implement it. > > > > FE had lived long enough to demonstrate it could prosper and live > > without this blown-up overhead. > > FE didn't have updates-testing, didn't do update announcements, had a > rolling release model etc. Those things don't work in a merged world. FE didn't have updates-testing because FESCo never wanted to offer such repositories and because plague didn't offer the necessary build targets. In turn, there has never been any work on creating code to maintain such repositories, not even on planning what would be needed [1] while Luke was working on the new updates system with access to internal code at Red Hat. There have been too many rumours about Red Hat opening up internal buildsys code, so that spending time on extending basic command-line tools a lot was not justified. [1] Recently I've shown thl what the rudimentary support for updates-testing repos in the current Extras pushscripts would look like. Pushing from plague needsign to updates-testing repos is not a problem. Pushing from updates-testing to the stable repos is not a problem either, but could need some love in the area of cleaning up old multi-lib test update packages. -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
