On 08/05/2009 02:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:25 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >> Sure. I'm just pointing out that you're trying to solve a different >> problem than either the original poster or Thorsten. (And now that I >> understand your problem better, perhaps yours is already solved :-) > > Well, I think it's really the same issue. The problem is one of > expectation: we have two similar components, GNOME and KDE, in the same > distribution, following different update polices - GNOME favours stable, > KDE favours adventurous. This confounds expectation. > This isn't solved by having two repositories. We'd still have a post on this list asking for the new GNOME release to be built for F-10 and we'd still have the GNOME maintainers say that they're not going to do that. > Yes, my problem is potentially almost solved with the tools at our > disposal and some little tweaks to interfaces, except for the problem > raised by Jesse, see my reply to his post. :) > Heh. I thought you were willing to accept that change when you talked about using tags rather than a separate repo :-) -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
