Pull off AIGLX repoistory?

[Denis Leroy]

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 16:26 +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> 
>>Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>
>>>>If X.Org 7.1 is made available as an official upgrade to Fedora 5 when
>>>>the Fedora Project/Red Hat are aware that it will break systems that
>>>>are in use across companies and institutions then Fedora will lose
>>>>credibility and trust with the administrators of those systems, which
>>>>will damage the reputation of Fedora/Red Hat, as well as convince
>>>>those organizations to look into alternatives where stability within a
>>>>release is valued as it used to be with Red Hat.
>>>
>>>by this argument Fedora wouldn't be able to release updated kernels
>>>including those with urgent security fixes.
>>
>>There is a difference between breaking things accidentally (a risk that you 
>>can never completely avoid) and breaking things deliberately and knowingly.
> 
> 
> quite often it is known that a kernel update breaks binary drivers. In
> fact that's the expected behavior (see stable_api_nonsense.txt as well
> as the OLS keynote of this year at
> http://www.kroah.com/log/2006/07/23/#ols_2006_keynote to see why), so I
> still don't see the difference...

This discussion is not about the linux kernel, but about the Fedora 
distro. And certainly the goal of a linux distribution is to provide a 
smooth experience. So if you're going to push an update that you know is 
going to inconvenience, say, 10% of your user base, you have to ask 
yourself some hard questions, no matter what the update or the 
inconvenience are.