Ian Pilcher (arequipeno@xxxxxxxxx) said: > On 12/01/2009 09:35 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > So, if our X maintainers won't handle bugs with it, we have a working > > default alternative that is maintained upstream, and it's *known* to > > be broken in the default configuration, why ship it? If we're trying to > > focus on quality, I'm not sure why we'd ship something that's known > > broken. > > Because the alternative may be more broken for some people? > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495688 If the e1000 driver is broken in the kernel for some people, we don't support shipping an alternate driver. If a new version of the intel graphics driver is broken for some people, we don't support shipping a pre-KMS version of the driver. Why would we do differently here? Bill -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
