2008/3/7, Jarod Wilson <jwilson@xxxxxxxxxx>:
I don't think anyone expects perfection, but when breakage goes so far as to encourage users to petition against an update being marked stable we might want to reconsider deploying. Not doing so reflects poorly on Fedora as a project to users in that our update policy looks dangerous to them and discourages testers from reporting problems since their experience will be that they are being ignored.
On Friday 07 March 2008 10:51:25 am Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
> On Thursday 06 March 2008 19:29:23 Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> > Sorry, we had to release with known bugs. A new kernel will be in
> > updates-testing very shortly.
>
> Why did you have to release with known bugs? Why not just wait until the
> bugs are fixed? The last three kernel updates broke suspend for me...
Uh... If we waited until all the known bugs were fixed, we'd never release
*any* kernel... :)
Despite this kernel making my own iwl4965 unusable, I was fully in favor of
releasing it. In theory, we fixed more problems than we caused, and you're
always welcome to keep running the prior kernel. (I'm actually running a
slightly modified 2.6.24.2-7.fc8 now).
I don't think anyone expects perfection, but when breakage goes so far as to encourage users to petition against an update being marked stable we might want to reconsider deploying. Not doing so reflects poorly on Fedora as a project to users in that our update policy looks dangerous to them and discourages testers from reporting problems since their experience will be that they are being ignored.
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
