On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 08:42 -0900, Jef Spaleta wrote: > I noticed it wasn't list as a common gotcha on the F15 commons bug > page that is maintained to handle these sorts of quibbles. Do we allow > for recognition of the "not supported" upgrade dance in the common > bugs information as a policy Yes. > or is it the "upgrade path that must not > be named"? No. Anything that people commonly encounter is fodder for commonbugs (though if it's to do with a third-party package or driver, or something from RPM Fusion, or Flash, you need to be somewhat careful with wording to ensure you don't give the impression Fedora 'supports' or 'promotes' any of those things). Again, it's a wiki page, please do go ahead and add things to it. I'd much rather not be the only person (or one of the few people) who edits that page. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
