On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 08:17:58AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 10:59 +0200, Michal Hlavinka wrote: > > > > I really agree with this. I think we need F11/updates and F11/updates-testing > > soon after devel freeze. You get bugs reported for snapshots, previews,... but > > fixing these bugs and especially delivering them to users is too much difficult > > imho. > > Erm, it's too hard to do the build, then propose a freeze break to fix > the bug? If the bug is important enough that you're getting reports on > it, why not propose that the final release has the bug fixed? Many bugs are not worth breaking the freeze for, but nor should the freeze bring development to a standstill. If upstream releases a new package, adds features or what-not (not necessarily fixing some critical bug) should I delay releasing an update for F10 because I don't want to conflict with the EVR of the package that was frozen for F11? I don't think you guys would be too happy if we all started requesting exceptions to the freeze for feature enhancements, etc. > > > > > In my dreamworld we have rawhide -> F11, F11/updates, F11/updates-testing in a > > few days after devel freeze. I think at least F11/updates-testing (without > > F11/updates available before day or two ago F11 GA) would be really > > appreciated by developers. > > I'm not sure what you mean by rawhide -> F11, however you do bring up an > interesting idea. Shortly after the freeze, if we did start releasing > updates-testing, then the things that pass -testing could indeed go to > the release rather than updates. That's not a terrible idea, I'll have > to think some on it and talk with the bodhi developer. Ray -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
