On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 15:25 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > supporters over the past couple of years. For me personally, the #2 issue is system > > stability. In their quest to be bleeding edge or whatever you want call it, I think we > > have sacrificed way too much in reliability and stability. > > That is a bit like joing the army and saying "I think we should be > pacifists". Even if you are right, the purpose and intent of the > organisation is to deliver something you apparently don't want. I would argue that it's more like joining the army and having them send you to the front line with untested, or even known defective weaponry. Yes, Fedora is designed to be cutting edge, but that doesn't mean that decent QA should just go out the window. Then, we have the examples of putting stuff into releases that is known to be buggy, like the firewire stack. It also looks like they're doing the same thing with NetworkManager in F9. The theory that things will mature faster if we force people to test them would be more viable if the recent bug triage hadn't proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that a huge number of bug reports are simply ignored. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of great things about Fedora, but it's certainly not above a certain amount of criticism. It's seemed, at times that this thread would have been more aptly named, "Fedora, love it or leave it!". Dave -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
