On Friday 29 September 2006 17:19, David Nielsen wrote: > > > > It is almost ironic because very few projects change so much code > > between major releases. :-) > > You are forgetting that the kernels inbetween have undergone extensive > testing in Development and with other distributions.. also we have > superhero DaveJ at the helm which counts for a lot when considering such > updates sane. No I am not. :-) Dave has been doing an amazing job, but even Dave recognises that sometimes those tests are not enough, due to the myriad of possible combinations of hardware out there. :-) The release earlier, release often allows also for better response time regarding hardware changes. > I'm sure if the same level of testing could be done to the gimp-print -> > gutenprint upgrade path it would be welcomed. Thus I would propose > putting it in Development after it opens for FC7, then send out a > bugzilla message like Dave does for every kernel update asking people to > recheck bugs against the new update, if people respond favorably then we > can put it in updates-testing maybe. I agree on all accounts. :-) > But switching 2 weeks prior to release without any regression testing is > a bit to risky for most peoples liking even given the benefits and alure > of new drivers. It is hard to disagree with that argument. :-) My point is this thread is that what distinguishes the kernel from gutenprint is the release policy (release often, release earlier) and not the code lines changed. The other case is the distinction between Core and Extras, for me if a project is in Fedora I don't care which component we are talking about. I hope and intend to work make this distinction even more blurred. :-) > - David Nielsen -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
