On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 14:35 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Adam Williamson (awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > "I want to select an input channel" is not remotely atypical. > > But then, the solution (in a time-based release system) is to decide > at the appropriate point that the new code does not hit the required > feature matrix yet, and shelve the new code until the next release > where it meets the required feature matrix. (See: Empathy). > > Where the issue arises here is that we've passed that appropriate point > in the schedule; since we can't push to the next release now, nor do we > have time to do anything new sanely, I'm not convinced that anything we > do/add now will be sufficiently better than doing nothing at all. I think adding an alternative mixer application which doesn't interfere with the new one in any way (and doesn't break anything significant even if it somehow fails to work entirely) is a pretty safe and conservative choice, and that's why FESco agreed to do so. It also confers a significant benefit, i.e. a way to adjust what needs to be adjusted without having to use an obscure console application which few people know how to use or are even aware exists. I mean, look, come on, just look at it from a pragmatic viewpoint: it's a single package containing code we've already shipped for multiple releases, which we *know* works. Heck, it's code Ubuntu 9.04 is shipping as its default mixer application. What, as slashdot would put it, couldpossiblygowrong? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
