Horst von Brand writes: > Philippe Rigault <prigault@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Due to circumstances outside of our control, we're going to be > > > unable to keep to the scheduled date of March 15th for the > > > release of FC5 and instead are going to have to make the > > > release date Monday, March 20th. While unfortunate in some > > > ways, this gives us the opportunity to pull in the final GNOME > > > 2.14 tarballs which should be available on Monday assuming the > > > changes are suitably minor. > > > I have two problems with this: > > > The first is that FC5 will be released essentially _untested_ after two > > of its main components were upgraded to a stable release after FC5test3: > > - gcc 4.1.0 > > - glibc-2.4 > > And the kernel has been updated almost daily, but that doesn't > count? > > > It could be argued that FC5 will be _released_ with a stable > > release of its compiler and C library, but not that this had been > > tested. > > Can't have it both ways (fix bugs timely + ultra-tested software only)... Indeed. The alternative is to re-start the test period whenever we make a minor revision to critical packages. I can't see anyone really wanting that. > > The second goes the same way, arguing that if test3 is the latest > > test release, any new major component should _not_ be upgraded to > > a new release, which is particularly true for a big beast like > > GNOME. > > There we could perhaps agree... but presumably the changes between > the current one and the final release are minor, bugfixes only? Hopefully. Andrew. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
