Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 09:12:05PM +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Patrice Dumas <pertusus <at> free.fr> writes:
In my response to that mail, failing to have a metric I retired my
proposal, and nobody supported my views (and overall nobody supported my
views).
In terms of those metrics, I'm still in favor of a mostly anarchical approach:
I completly agree. This is simple and leave everything to the packagers
initiative, I think that it is also what Ralf had in mind. But some people
insisted on communicating to the public what was maintained, hence my
proposal. But what you propose is better.
--
Pat
Up to here you definitely had my sympathy. But this anarchical approach
makes me wonder who your target audience is. I would think that the
majority of people who wouldn't want to upgrade to an official Fedora
release would be people who need stability. Fedora itself is probably a
little bit too unstable for them. These people would probably want more
than the average level of QA. To borrow a phrasing from Jef, legacy
updates should be edible by babies.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
