On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 11:27 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 21.04.2010, 20:33 -0400 schrieb William Jon McCann: > > Hi, > > > > So, that's cool. I take it back - let's not limit pointless updates - > > it is certainly a silly idea. ;) > > IF they are pointless, they should be limited to 0. If they are just > optional, there are still users who want the latest and the greatest > versions. During the whole discussion about the update process we > learned that this is one of the main reasons why many people prefer > Fedora over other distributions. I think the one thing we learned is that Kevin can write more emails and shout louder than anybody else. I challenge you to find a single Fedora user who only uses Fedora because it can produce more untested updates than any other distribution. > Sorry, but to me this attitude sounds arrogant. People "just doing > something" - especially GNOME people - is not how community works and > often is the source of a very unpleasant update experience. Sure, doing something works by gathering a rough consensus between the major parties and then start doing something. Waiting for the great world-spanning consensus of everybody is a recipe for endless flamewars and doing nothing. > Think of the recent hal update that broke every desktop but GNOME in > F13. It was not announced (at least not for F13) and it was pushed > after the beta freeze only for the GNOME people to finish their hal > removal feature. Is this your idea of just doing "great things"? I'm pretty sure we can find one or two broken update that you have pushed in the past as well. Do you really think we should sink to that level of discussion ? -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
