no mandatory QA testing at all [Re: crazy thought about how to ease QA testing]

[Jesse Keating]

On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 15:09 -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
> I have been apalled at what generally passes as QA in the
> "Linux Community" generally, and FC specifically. Since I
> barely tolerate what exists now, it is difficult to contemplate
> someone considering even more laxity saying "I'm not so sure
> what the problem is here." I am astounded, amazed, and shocked. 

I don't see a problem because this is not an enterprise class operating
system, we are not an enterprise class project, and you don't get
enterprise class QA for free.  Please look into RHEL if you want
guaranteed QA.  CentOS won't be enough for you as there is very little
QA that happens between the rebuild of a RHEL srpm and a push to the
public.  Enterprise guaranteed QA comes at a price.  If you're not even
willing to contribute some time to the project, why in gods name would
you expect anything in return?

What I am appalled by is the general feeling of "I should get things my
way, and it should be free" I see in the Linux user community.  As I've
stated before, you get out what you put in.

-- 
Jesse Keating RHCE      (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team      (www.fedoralegacy.org)
GPG Public Key          (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legacy-list/attachments/20060214/c17a1ed9/attachment.sig>