On 09/29/2009 08:17 PM, John Poelstra wrote: >>> [...snip...] >>> >>> I want to be perfectly clear that I'm not sounding an "all clear" on >>> this by any means. If your answer here means that this change hasn't >>> been thoroughly tested, you're going to have a hard time convincing >>> anyone that it should be turning over on Beta freeze day. >>> >> By no means did I interpret that at all... but here lies the >> problem... I had no idea I would have to convenience *anybody* >> of *anything* because I thought I made the dead line... again all >> following was the schedule in: >> >> http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/372823-all-features-need-100-beta-freeze-2009-09-29-a.html >> >> >> And Today I am %100 finished... Please point out which part of that >> did I misinterpret, because the last thing I want to do is cause >> problems... >> >> steved. >> > > > Thanks, > John > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-announce/2009-July/msg00027.html > > > Many of us were assuming that "testable" and "significantly complete" > would be enough to imply that a change like this should be done so it > could be tested during the Alpha. > > How should we word things differently in the future so it is clearer? Again, John, that is a wonderful question... From my perspective I had my head down working as hard as I could to make this deadline... I knew about the alpha deadline and this dealing... I my past, added things of this size in a beta release was actually common.. In alpha release you get the software married to the hardware (i.e. barely booting) and in beta release you added everything else... Now the post beta release is when the door close... nothing but bug fixes.. steved. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
