On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 19:39 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Jesse Keating wrote: > > Yes, you bear some risk in using rawhide. There is no reward without > > risk. We can mitigate some of that risk by placing automated testing > > between the builds and the users. Some reduction in risk is far better > > than no reduction is it not? Would it not be nice to see rawhide > > reports without the huge list of broken deps? Would it not be nice to > > have a rawhide build update that doesn't segfault upon execution? These > > are the kinds of things that happen now, that AutoQA could prevent. > > That makes rawhide vastly more consumable than it currently is. > > But it is no replacement for the current non-conservative updates to > releases, whereas the OP's proposal wants to drop those in favor of the > "consumable" Rawhide. > Somebody is going to have to pay the price. Either users on our released Fedoras will have to pay the price of potentially unstable updates coming at them, changing behavior and adding regressions, or the users who want those kind of updates will have to pay the price of other potentially unstable updates coming along too, changing behavior and adding regressions. The question is who gets to suffer? Right now, everybody is. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
