On Tue, 2009-10-20 at 13:30 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Tue, 2009-10-20 at 13:23 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > We could try a 9-month release schedule like we did with FC5. I seem to > > recall that ended in tears, though. > Just stretching things out is not going to help obviously, because > people would do more feature development. As I said, to make a > difference, you have to specifically stretch the non-feature-development > phases to make a difference. Or calm things down far enough in rawhide > that the feature-development phase is not a total loss in terms of > having a usable and testable system. I hope that the various rawhide > changes that are underway are going to get some results in that > direction next cycle. I guess I'm not yet convinced that these changes couldn't have been introduced earlier. is there a specific reason why you could not have made these exact changes a month ago? For me at least, the 'feature-development phase' is not a total loss. I've been running Rawhide exclusively on this system (my main work system, I use it for almost everything) since March, all the way through the F12 cycle. I was able to do so without much trouble. If these changes had been introduced earlier, I at least would have noticed and probably flagged them up for release notes, and I know there are others who run Rawhide as I do. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- Fedora-desktop-list mailing list Fedora-desktop-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
