On Friday 07 March 2008 12:28:17 pm David Nielsen wrote: > 2008/3/7, Jarod Wilson <jwilson@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > 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 Yeah, I know, that was sorta tongue-in-cheek. :) > 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. I suppose there would be that. But we're also supposed to be pretty leading-edge, and we've been stuck on 2.6.23 for a while... Fun balancing act sometimes... I took those of us with problems to be a vocal minority in this case. For the vast majority of people, that kernel works great, fixes issues with prior kernels, etc., etc. -- Jarod Wilson jwilson@xxxxxxxxxx -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
