On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 03:09 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Adam Williamson wrote: > > I'd recommend asking dcantrell, as he has some good points on this > > topic. I broadly agree with him that it might well be more or less > > impossible to smoothly handle a major rewrite of anaconda in our current > > development process. CCing to make sure he sees this. > > There's only one sane conclusion to draw from that: There MUST NOT be a > major rewrite of Anaconda, EVER. That it was allowed to happen for F18 was a > major mistake. > > Anaconda is the least tested component in Fedora (most people test it at > most once every 6 months) Offsetting this is the fact that the QA team tests it massively, massively more than we test any other component. anaconda is certainly far more heavily tested than any niche package in the distro - the scientific tools, obscure desktops, apps not many people use etc. It's clearly absurd to say it's the least tested component. > and arguably the most critical (because it is > required to get Fedora up and running at all). The less it changes, the > better! This is the path to stagnation: it's old code, but we're too scared to change it. The older it gets, the more scared we get. And then you wake up and it's 2012 and your business still runs on a System/38 mainframe. That's not what Fedora is supposed to be about. -- 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
