On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 15:33 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 05/26/2015 12:10 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > Something needs to be done, but I'm not sure > > exactly what. > > IMO, all this should not be a problem, if collaborative maintenance > works. > > What I mean, IMO, critical packages should have a sufficient number > of > co-maintainers, who should be presumed to be sufficiently familiar > with > a package to provide enough karma, which would allow such packages to > > pass quickly. > That might work for comparatively simple packages, but what about the kernel? Kernel updates have the potential to completely break things (particularly if the security patch comes along with a point release). I'm not trying to disparage the kernel maintainers, but there's absolutely no way they can test all possible hardware before releasing an update. There's still value to the updates-testing repo, even for security updates. I agree we need to figure out ways to "grease the wheels" so that important updates get out faster, though.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
