FC2 doubtful quality?
Robin Laing
Robin.Laing at drdc-rddc.gc.ca
Wed Jun 23 14:29:12 UTC 2004
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>
>> Dexter Ang wrote:
>>
>>> So I guess developers were "pressured" to release on a deadline, hoping
>>> to fix most bugs through updates. As much as I'd personally love to help
>>> test and test until all bugs are stamped out, you can't avoid the fact
>>> that a lot of other people simply won't test until a "final" release is
>>> out.
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure how typical I am, but I haven't run any test releases
>> because it has been said that one cannot upgrade from a test release
>> to a new FC release.
>
>
> for good reason -- since a test release is attempting to emulate, as
> closely as possible, the upcoming official release, to "upgrade" from a
> test release to a new FC release is, in essence, upgrading from a
> version to something representing that same version. logically, it
> really doesn't make a lot of sense -- i suspect the logistics involved
> would be just
> nightmarish.
>
> rday
>
>
Why would this be so hard? Using up2date and package names should
make updating easy. Testing packages could be named with a 't' or use
the 'rc' in the package name. When the final release is out, drop the
'rc' or 't' so up2date knows that these need to be updated. Heck, the
package xxx.1.0-0t should be updated when xxx.1.0-1 is released, correct?
My problem for not using "testing" packages is I have to have my
machines working at all times. I also require the applications to be
working for work. At home my wife will kill me if I cannot explain
the reason for updating from 1.1 to 1.1.1. But that is some of the
fun of being married to someone that won't allow the other major OS
into our house or M$ Windows.
--
Robin Laing
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list