On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 12:21 -0500, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > If that put an end to stuff like 'sorry, that last glibc rpm bricks your > system if you have the misfortune of installing it'... maybe. As I said, > right now my "line" is "packages that the maintainers consider stable". > If "rawhide" became that (and some new "rawhide-testing" or such for the > current free-for-all), then I suppose I might use it. I'd also ask how > that differs in any significant way from a rolling release. > > To be clear, 1. I would be in favor of a rolling release system, and 2. > development /needs/ a "free for all" environment. So please don't take > the above as being in any way opposed to such an environment existing... > just so long as I can opt out of it ;-). Well with the no frozen rawhide proposal, from the Alpha freeze point on there would be such an updates-testing for the pending release, while rawhide remains the wild west. You could say install F12, then at F13 Alpha jump onto F13 and have the much newer more often content that has had some testing. Just keep jumping to the next Alpha and you have your "rolling release" as it were. > > Oh, and on a related note, it would be really helpful if it was possible > to enable updates-testing only for certain packages (and when needed, > dependencies thereof) on a permanent whitelist basis. include=<package> in the yum conf for updates-testing. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
