On Thu, 2019-05-02 at 08:49 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 5/2/19 8:32 AM, Samuel Sieb wrote: > > On 4/30/19 8:33 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > You redirected the OP to test@, at a point in time, when - though fc30 > > > had not been formally announced - fc30 already had been in place on > > > the download servers. > > > > > > That said, you were just behaving bureaucratic and nit-picking, IMHO. > > > > Even though it had been technically "released", an upgrade problem right > > at release is probably better brought to the attention of the QA people. > > Are you seriously trying to tell us, these folks will look into reported > probs, when the release already was rubberstamped "go" several hours > before the OPs posting and technically in place on the mirrors? > > Serious, I find this rediculous. I pointed out that a post relating to unreleased software should go on the Test list. That is the official policy of this list. When dealing with a new release of Fedora, up to the point it is announced, I consider it to be unreleased. There doesn't appear to be any formal definition of what "released" means other than the announcement, so that's what I'm going with. And the number of times we see posts related to unreleased software on this list leads me to the conclusion that, far from being bureaucratic and nit-picking, the occasional reminder is necessary. poc _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
