Hello Krzysztof, Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 3:36:43 PM, you wrote: > Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> 2) It is impossible to ensure that functionality will not be reduced >> without sufficient testing. > True. The whole point of an update may be the deliberate removal of features/functionality. This includes removal of elements whose upstream is dead, removal of conflicts between packages, conversion of static/copied libraries to the system provided library, removal of features which are irretrievably broken, and those elements which do not fit within Fedora's licence/mission (mp3 support, or patented material). >> 3) Sufficient testing of software inherently requires manual >> intervention by more than one individual. > Definitely. IOW, the testing is never sufficient. Any nontrivial piece of software contains bugs until it reaches end-of-life. This is a simple fact of life. You can't test quality into a product like Fedora. You can only attempt to assist developers in discovering issues that have escaped their unit tests, so that through iterations of design/code/test the package becomes stable and feature complete. It takes many iterations, across many releases for some packages. >> 1) Updates to stable that result in any reduction of functionality to >> the user are unacceptable. An absolute rule containing "any" ignores reality. > That means any and all updates are unacceptable. > -- > Krzysztof Halasa The opposite of change is death. No updates as a hard and fast rule would drive many users and packages away from Fedora. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
