F11 Proposal: Stabilization

[Jesse Keating]

On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 20:24 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> 
> No, but it would be nice to have a way to avoid most of the 'new 
> brokenness' at times when it might be inconvenient even while others are 
> taking advantage (and their chances) with new features.   The kernel 
> update late in FC6's life that crashed with many scsi controllers (and 
> was quickly fixed) would be a good example of the type of thing that 
> could have been avoided on some machines with some mechanism to delay 
> updates for a bit on the machines where you care.

So again, why wouldn't people using updates-testing have caught this?
Oh probably because the people who had systems that would have triggered
this bug wouldn't want to use the risky repo.  Which means they would
all fall back to the updates-tested repo you talk about and history
would repeat itself, but maybe then you'd ask for a
updates-tested-no-really-I-mean-it

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20081118/81aa7e4c/attachment.sig>