Kevin Kofler wrote:
Andras Simon <szajmi <at> gmail.com> writes:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines
That's the process for new packages, not for updates to existing ones. Updates
don't have to get reviewed, but they have to be careful about not breaking
things, so pushing something as major as OO.o 3 as an update to a stable
distribution does not sound like a good idea to me.
I think calling Fedora a "stable distribution" is stretching things. Fedora is
pretty close to the edge, so you generally don't wait for those updates.
I can see why OO would be help off, the human interface changes, and probably
gimp does too, somebody new seems to win the "how it should work" battle every
release and things change. Usually for the better, but visibly.
2.6.27 is such a huge leap for many people that getting it out really should be
treated as a bug fix, many missing or broken drivers added (some were
retrofitted to 2.6.26 for Fedora users), and mtrr handling was vastly improved,
giving many people a LOT more usable memory.
In general Fedora is pretty current, a pleasant change from some other
distributions.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
