Le vendredi 29 octobre 2004 à 18:22 -0400, Charles R. Anderson a écrit : > On Sat, Oct 30, 2004 at 12:05:02AM +0200, Matias Féliciano wrote: > > My "opinion". > > Today, Fedora does not support : > > - FC(x) => FC(x+1)T(y) and FC(x)T(y) => FC(x) . > > I'm pretty sure the former is supported--the goal is always to support > upgrading to what will become FC(x+1). Of course, what do you mean by > "support"? Anaconda doesn't outright prevent you from doing any > upgrades, so all upgrades are "supported" in that sense. > > > - FCx => FC(x+1)RC(y) and FC(x)RC(y) => FC(x) > > should be supported. > > "supported" how? If I can't update from FC3RC1 to FC3 it should be considered as a bug. If after an update from FC1 to FC3RC1 there still bugs, they should be considered as confirmed bugs. Fedora should not request to do a fresh install to confirm the bug. > These are test releases. I know. > The goal is always to have > upgrades work, especially as we get closer to a release, but there > will be bugs in test releases that cannot be solved always without a > fresh install (unless you know how to fix the issues manually > yourself). An example of this is package version downgrades. After rc1, fedora should not downgrade package. Fedora is freeze since Test 3. I am not requesting for a "strong" support. Information in the release note to update from FC3RC(x) to FC3 is enough (perhaps with some "rpm -U --oldpackage :-)).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=