On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 01:13:51PM +0100, Jan Zelený wrote: > > The onus in Fedora has _ALWAYS_ been to prove that the new feature is > > complete and ready to replace the existing working solution, not for > > everyone else to prove that it's not. > I'm not so sure about that. Off the top of my head, I can think of rpm-4.12, > UsrMove and systemd - those were neither proven flawless, nor they have been > without issues when deployed. I bet there was at least one major change in > each Fedora that was not flawless when accepted. Yeah, I think you're right about the history. However, I also _really_ hope that we can learn from what went right and what went wrong in each of those cases, and reduce potentional user pain. Growing the actual user base is a big priority right now, and I want to make sure that we find the right balance as we also chase the "first" foundation. We haven't always gotten it right in the past, and if we do decide that we want to set it a little more conservatively this time, please don't take that as singling out DNF. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
