Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:11 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Every time anyone mentions slowing down the feature changes in favor of
fixing the brokenness there are a flurry of postings from people saying they
want all the new features they can get.
Are you talking about known brokenness that exists and has been
reported already.. or new brokenness that we don't know about yet that
is introduced in updates that our current ability to test failed to
catch?
There will always be some of both and some large number of real-world
users are what it takes to sort them out.
Holding back isn't going to magically help us prevent new
brokenness of any variety.
No, but it would be nice to have a way to avoid most of the 'new
brokenness' at times when it might be inconvenient even while others are
taking advantage (and their chances) with new features. The kernel
update late in FC6's life that crashed with many scsi controllers (and
was quickly fixed) would be a good example of the type of thing that
could have been avoided on some machines with some mechanism to delay
updates for a bit on the machines where you care.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
