Le vendredi 29 octobre 2004 à 19:11 -0400, Paul Iadonisi a écrit : > On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 18:45, Matias Féliciano wrote: > > > If I can't update from FC3RC1 to FC3 it should be considered as a bug. > > Not likely to happen. Ever. If you wish to donate development effort > to anaconda and lobby the anaconda developers to incorporate > testrelease->officialrelease (all combinations) specific hacks, then you > are welcome to do that. Good point. "yum/up2date --update" should work. > I'm sure the current anaconda developers have > plenty enough to do that they are probably not interested in wasting > time on upgrades *from* test releases. > > > 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. > > You are correct, here. However, sometimes is can be quite helpful to > determine whether a problem exists in both upgrades and installs or just > in upgrades. Sometimes, upgrade problems can be harder to fix. Even > tricky enough that they can't safely be fix in an automated way, > especially when a choice has to be made that is best made by the user. > But identifying something as an upgrade problem can narrow down the > problem and provide, via the release notes, a way to mitigate or fix the > problem manually. > If you've done upgrades of *any* other OS, you must know that almost > all upgrades have some issues. Usually, they are minor, and often, they > are 'release-noted'. > But if something gets closed as NOTABUG because it is an upgrade > problem (from official release to test release), then I'd bitch, too. > WONTFIX, I can deal with, though, if it's due to a engineering resource > issue. > > [snip] > > > After rc1, fedora should not downgrade package. Fedora is freeze since > > Test 3. > > In an ideal world, yes. But there are times when it's unavoidable. > > > 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 :-)). > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > Well, that makes sense. But sometimes, as I mentioned above, there > are some things that may need user intervention. Stuff that anaconda > does to fix some things up, that won't work with interim test release > due to an attempt to integrate something into the release that failed. > Two examples from the FC2 cycle come to mind that might have caused > problems: evolution 1.5 and selinux. During Release Candidat ? Are you sure ? > Someone more intimately involved > with those may be able to confirm or deny if these specifically would > have been a problem for upgrades from interim test releases, but they > are just examples to illustrate a point. And that is that big > integration efforts sometimes don't succeed in time for release. And > that makes for messy, error-prone, from-test-release upgrades. > > -- > -Paul Iadonisi > Senior System Administrator > Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist > Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. > GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=