On 03/04/2010 10:15 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> > In other words, SIG's current policy is doing more harm than good >> > for Fedora. > Not necessarily. There has also been some very positive feedback for the KDE > 4.4 updates, and some people are using Fedora BECAUSE such updates get > pushed. > I agree with Kevin that timely software upgrades in Fedora are a GOOD thing. The problem is not updates---it's the QA. It just should not happen that updates fail to even start up out of the box. I recognize that sometimes the problem is caused by the specific system configuration, but I have first-hand examples where the app was just plain broken. The dilemma of course is what to do in such case: currently it's either shipping the app or taking it out of the distro. Perhaps there should be a RPM property that flagged apps with known major bugs, so that the end users could chose between - always updating everything and dealing with breakage later - updating only security fixes - updating only security fixes and 'no-known-defects' apps Such choice would be a global user-settable system setting, I presume. Perhaps there could be a separate setting per package group, because it would make sense to want the latest versions of engineering apps, while leaving email and desktop enough alone. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
