On Sun, 2009-11-29 at 09:23 +0000, Terry Barnaby wrote: > > That doesn't scale. There's lots of useful pages in the Wiki. We can't > > link to all of them from the front page. > I was thinking of this more as a special Graphics debug push :) Special cases are never a good idea. > >> and add some search terms such as "Graphics Problems", "3D problems" etc. > > > > I'm not sure you can add search terms to Wiki pages, but if you can, > > then sure. > I would have thought that simply adding the text for these in the page would > have helped searching ? It would be rather ugly, though? > > It's a decent idea, the problem I have with it is you wind up with a > > forest of little scripts with no decent maintenance strategy. I'd rather > > have a more integrated and properly maintained tool, it may grow out of > > abrt in future. > Yes, but that the moment the Graphics bugs seem to have random user inputs > of information. I would have thought that a simple script to help with just > Graphics bugs would help just now. (I am hoping all of the graphics problems > will have gone away by next year :) ) This is never a good way of thinking. The more experience you get with working on an ongoing project like a Linux distribution, the more you want to do _everything_ in a properly planned and sustainable framework, because you find that the things you think will just be temporary hacks never ever wind up that way. They just get built into the plumbing and make people's lives miserable forever :) Hoping all graphics problems will go away in a year is definitely not a good way to plan. :) > > We don't do this except for extreme major brokenness which we somehow > > missed during testing, it's not worth the effort involved. Fedora Unity > > does updated re-spins, however they haven't got anything out for F11 yet > > due to some problems, I believe they're looking for extra volunteers. > > > > You say that producing a Fedora "12.1" release is "not worth the effort > involved". Is that truly the case ? > Certainly that is what I always do here. Normally the initial Fedora releases > contain quite a few issues and there are a flurry of updates. So I use pungi to > create my own updated release that I use to install on further systems. There is > very little effort in this and, I would have thought, not to much further > testing effort needed. It is a problem that anaconda updates aren't released > however. Certainly from the users front I would have thought that this is worth > the effort. It allows them to install a Fedora system with the core bugs that > users have found fixed in one pass. Building a spin isn't that much work. Validating it (yes, QA would not want to release any image which hadn't been through full installation validation testing) and doing all the other release gubbins which happens as _well_ as just spinning an image is a lot more work. Not doing .1 releases has been the releng's team position for a long time. I'm not in the releng team so I'm not going to argue their position for them, but it is a properly argued one. Jesse can give you full set of reasons if you like, and if he feels like rehashing them :) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
