On Mon, 11 May 2009 05:27:55 +0200, Ralf wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sun, 10 May 2009 12:59:16 +0300, Jussi wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 21:33 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > >>> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >>>> I'll tell you the three reasons I'm pushing stuff directly to stable: > >>>> > >>>> (1) New package. > >>>> [cut] > >>> Is it a good practice to push a new package to stable? > > > > No. > > I strongly disagree. Adding "stable" packages to stable is the primary > interest contributors are after. It's the #1 reason, why Fedora Extras > one had been launched. Cool down and slow down, at least a bit, please. This is about not skipping updates-testing. This is about offering them at least a few days in updates-testing, so the community may contribute actual testing. Fact is that one packager plus one reviewer are not enough to ensure that new packages really work good enough to call them "stable" for one or more dist targets. > What destabilizes Fedora is Fedora being based on insufficiently stable > SW, not "new packages". Agreed, but that's a different topic. Poor updates also create chaos in buildroots. We've had issues like that already during Fedora Extras. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
