Hans Kristian Rosbach wrote: > > Yes, so they claim. However I have not been able to locate > much info about these isos. > > I also don't know whether they use the official FC5 anaconda rpm > (with its bugs) or their own rebuild of it. And if it is a "private" > rebuild, I just don't like the idea as it raises a lot of concerns. > > Oh, and I'll have to correct my previous statement. I met a lot > of cooperation from Rahul, and I am very thankful for that. > Unfortunately we could not resolve the problems (see previous threads) > by ourself. > > > I will most likely make private respins for use in-house, just like > what we had planned the FC4 ones to be. We have a pretty strict > policy about knowing the origins and details of packages. > > -HK > Hans, Yes right now our re-spins are *private* until testing can be completed. We are using a slightly modified testing matrix that was used by Release Engineering to make sure the ISOs are of a quality that deserves the Fedora name. If you are interested in contributing to our effort feel free to contact me. -- Robert 'Bob' Jensen * * http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BobJensen gpg fingerprint: F9F4 7243 4243 0043 2C45 97AF E8A4 C3AE 42EB 0BC6 Fedora Docs Projects FDSCo http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
