On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 6:09 AM, Jon Ciesla <limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I agree, and thought Seth made his point well. I typically consider the > set of things in Fedora I need to worry about to be the set of bugs > assigned to me, plus the ones I've files, plus any FTFFS or broken deps > I'm aware of. If something sits there for years, no bugs, no need for > rebuild, and no new releases, and it works, then I'm happy. Very happy > in fact. I'm not actually sure that the packages on that list that I am responsible for actually do work.. nor do I have any evidence that anyone uses these packages on such a regular basis that they would be tested in the run up to a release. Hell man, matplotlib was runtime broken for over a month and it wasn't until Beta that someone actually filed a ticket about it (after I discovered the problem myself) and I expect matplotlib more widely used than something like g3data. Unless I start getting some affirmative feedback through some sort of phone home process, similar to popcon, that my packages are actually installed and used I have to assume that noone is using them on a regular basis and noone is testing prior to release. So in that sense Seth's list is a reminder to me to test those packages for myself on the Beta (now that I have a Beta install up and running...even though there was an intel graphics problem during install...but that's another story) -jef"I have a very very long rant que'd up about falling back from a graphical install to a text install that is so minimal that it doesnt even include lspci. I've no problem with a text based install that is very minimal for people who deliberately choose to use it... but I have a really big problem failing over to it from a graphical install and expecting people who don't know what they are doing to know wtf is going on after they reboot the system"spaleta -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
