[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: The updates firehose

Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 01:06:39 +0000 (UTC), Kevin Kofler wrote:

The many updates are really Fedora's strength,

... and also one of its weaknesses, since the users don't like it at all
if an update breaks something.

This is one thing I suspect is being lost in all the talk about trust and freedom. Maintainer's freedom doesn't mean much if there is a avalanche of updates where updates-testing time can be reduced or skipped any time and where every update increases the chances of breaking stuff

Here we go again. Before regulating everything to dead, first please try to objectively measure that which you are trying to regulate, then analyze those objective measurements, deducting whats working well and what isn't and then try to steer things, using little adjustments so that what isn't working well becomes better without causing regressions all over the place.

More to the point, the last couple of releases extras updates and even extras rolling release model have been causing not all that many upgrade issues / pains. Yes there are things to improve, like not allowing updates which will result in broken dep chains. But overall extras didn't do all that bad. Most of time there is an update which causes all kinda troubles its a former core update and not a former extras update.


Hans (who has queued only 2 updates on 125+ packages, since F-7 release).

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]