On 08/15/2013 03:16 PM, drago01 wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 9:02 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
<johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 08/15/2013 02:26 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 01:02:42PM -0400, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Well whomever choose to decide that we "support" upgrades in the
first place bypassed the QA community entirely in making that
decision as well as to which tool is "preferred","supported" or
"recommended".
If QA is testing something other than the supported upgrade mechanism,
then QA should rectify that. The communication has been very clear -
if fedup fails to upgrade then that's considered a bug, and if any other
approach fails then it may not be.
Our release criteria and everything we defined *after* we found out that we
suddenly supported upgrades is solid which is not what I was saying or
referring to.
Suddenly? They always have been "supported" that even dates back to
the Redhat Linux days ...
I should clarify what I'm talking about is the discussion of
"officially" supporting upgrading while you probably mean it has been
technically possible which has indeed been available for a long time.
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
