On Tue, 2016-08-30 at 20:54 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > * Author mentions the Skylake fiasco in recommending that users wait a > > couple months before updating to the new release; familiar suggestions > > that our distro is unstable. In a sense it's Intel's fault for the bad > > update, but other distros did not ship this broken update. This could > > probably have been avoided if our update system was more conservative. > > It's nuts that we have important packages going from testing to stable > > in less than a day and we should fix this. > > We often joke, but part of the burden of attempting to be first means > we're the first to hit issues before other distros do (first to fail). > I agree microcode_ctl should have been in testing longer than a day. > Adding it to critpath would enforce that. I think it's somewhat folly > to assume that any reasonable amount of time in testing is going to > catch every issue like this. If it's not in the critpath list it should be, because it's *clearly* part of the critical path per that definition: "Packages within the critical path are required to perform the most fundamental actions on a system. Those actions include: ... post- install booting" In case anyone hadn't noticed, comps now works on a pull request basis, through pagure, so anyone can submit a PR to fix this: https://pagure.io/fedora-comps fork and submit a PR from your fork, github-style. -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
