On Sun, 2005-04-10 at 23:41 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Sun, 10 Apr 2005, Chuck R. Anderson wrote: > > > I don't see the need for a full iso set to be generated that often. > > Test releases are just "stable" points in the rawhide tree that > > happen about once a month. I think this is often enough for full > > iso sets. > > it's *not* often enough if you're talking about official test > releases, for which RH is looking for as much feedback as they can > get, and there's a serious installation flaw that prevents a > significant number of people from even getting it onto their systems. > and, typically, these installation problems are identified within > about a day of availability and are fixed almost immediately, so > there's no reason not to slap up a fixed ISO. Given the amount of data this means resending to mirrors, this might be one reason for not doing so. Maybe instead of 'slapping up a fixed ISO' (which while it had some noted issues, also worked very well for many people), the developers could look at releasing a 'update' for the installer to fix these problems. I've seen this used to fix problems with the installer after the release (the filesystem/parted stuff with FC3 for example) and it works well and the file size for such 'updates' are small enough and easy enough to use. Would this be possible? Rodd. Rodd