On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Kyrre Ness Sjobak wrote: > fre, 28.01.2005 kl. 10.53 skrev Rahul Sundaram: > > --- Colin Charles <byte@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 19:46 +0100, Kyrre Ness Sjobak > > > wrote: > > > > Personally, i would believe a q&a mailinglist and > > > a "testing" repo for > > > > yum could be a good idea, in order to get packages > > > as good tested as > > > > possible - as fast as possible. > > > > > > There is a testing repo, its called updates-testing > > > (look > > > in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates-testing.repo). > > > Discussion of that > > > happens at fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx as do the > > > announcements for new > > > packages > > > > > > However, I don't think many folk test it and QA it, > > > and it usually gets > > > pushed out as an update (updates-released) within a > > > couple of days > > > > > > So, whats your issue with an update that core had? > > > > > > there were several regressions. kernels, gui for > > firewall with relation to selinux, network manager and > > so on. I am sure many of them are well know if you > > search in the users list and bugzilla > > > And now, the openoffice bug. Major one (wrong shortcuts i think it was) Fix is waiting on releng to get pushed. Main cause was updating the tarball to latest supposedly "stable" ooo-build sources, into which Novell had pushed a few broken patches. Will be more careful in the future, but the 1.1.2->1.1.3 transition was difficult and people really seemed to want 1.1.3 for some reason. Dan
