On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 3) Sufficient testing of software inherently requires manual >> intervention by more than one individual. >> > This isn't entirely true either. #3 is so true that is central to what distros are about. Upstream probably released a good updated version, but the distro role is to do the integration, and shake out all the bugs in those subtle interactions between components. Otherwise, distros could provide the installer + @base and for the rest we could all grab RPMs from upstreams' websites. The QA of the integrated set of packages at particular release is hard and complex. That's what Fedora does, as a distro, and is central to what Fedora is, and the implicit social contract -- these components perform together in tune like a well-rehearsed orchestra. If the trombonist buys a new and shiny trombone, great, but for the piece he's playing tonight he'll have to play with the old trombone. The new trombone may be slightly out of tune, or louder, or tinnier; none of those things are bad per se, but it will ruin the combined effort. > One person can manually evaluate That's the "it works for me" attitude. Works for small software projects with a couple users. Not for a hugely complex OS, one that others use as the base for their own work. cheers, m -- martin.langhoff@xxxxxxxxx martin@xxxxxxxxxx -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
