On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 02:06 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 07:31 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Sunday 10 June 2007 04:48:16 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > > I feel like you're saying that Core's "culture" (whatever you mean by that) > > > should have precedence over Extras' and that "your way" is better than > > > "our way". I assure you that Extras maintainers didn't just "fire and > > > forget" their updates. They were tested. Yes, some accidents happened, but > > > that was the price of greater freedom the maintainers used to have. So > > > please don't try to discourage those who managed to put up with all the new > > > obstacles any further. > > > > I didn't mean to say that Core's was better. Just different. > Core was worse ... Core maintainers not shipping updated packages was/is > the reason for me to locally rebuild "up-distro" packages or locally > build patched packages. > Me too. We use Fedora in some "non-typical" production environment, hence some "hidden" bugs affect us from time to time. Any attempt to bugzilla it (i.e. to share the fixes with other people) does nothing -- we are compelled to rebuild locally. :( Sometimes even the "back-porting" of the new "rawhide" package into the current used release is enough. It looks a bit strange -- there is a new upstream stable version, this version works OK, is fully compatible with the current Fedora release we use, but is present in rawhide only... We even thought in the past of creating of some "more fast updates for Core" repository... Dmitry Butskoy -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
