On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:35:49 Dan Horák wrote: > Seth Vidal píše v Út 09. 03. 2010 v 08:02 -0500: > > On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > > Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change > > > update policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who > > > are our user and what they want. Now someone wants to know who are our > > > users/what our users really want, we don't want to know it, because we > > > don't want to do Fedora for what users want or need, because we're > > > developing Fedora for us. Funny ;-) > > > > Actually, I want to make the update policies so that we have fewer BROKEN > > things. > > Ok, we all want to minimalize broken things, but please forgive my maybe > stupid question - how many broken things are there actually or had been > in the past? Don't you want to complicate live of thousands of packages > just because only few tens made troubles? > Another question - how many broken things we shipped in release that could be fixed by updates? We shipped lot of unfinished, feature incomplete stuff in history... Nobody can't say I'm for shipping broken stuff - for release, updates etc... I'm usually the one who says no for incomplete/broken stuff ;-) But please stop this. What I wanted to point out is that there ARE users out there and we should know, WHO are our users. Or we can take a risk and set target audience so we would know it or we can be all-catch distro but then we have to behave like we are all-catch... In this case you know - we need compromise... Jaroslav > Dan > > PS: I don't have the statistics so the numbers are pure guess. -- Jaroslav Řezník <jreznik@xxxxxxxxxx> Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno Office: +420 532 294 275 Mobile: +420 731 455 332 Red Hat, Inc. http://cz.redhat.com/ -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
