[Fedora-livecd-list] liveinst conflicts with anaconda

[Rahul Sundaram]

Will Woods wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-03-24 at 03:19 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> Jesse Keating wrote:
>>> On Friday 23 March 2007 17:29:37 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>>> It was in the Fedora 7 Test 2 live cd. I got it when I installed it to
>>>> my hard disk. Doing a yum update today results in a conflict. Why should
>>>> a end user run into this?
>>> Trying to expect sane paths from anything less then Test3 is pretty 
>>> unreasonable.
>> It is not unreasonable at all. The liveinst package should have been on 
>> the officially repositories. The review and the process was bypassed to 
>> get test 2 on time which is fine but let's not use that as a excuse not 
>> to add a simple obsolete to Anaconda to ensure that users can update 
>> properly. We should strive to provide sane updates paths from every 
>> release to every release regardless of whether it is a test or not. It 
>> might not be possible in some corner cases which this is not. Our end 
>> users and testers deserve more respect for their time.
> 
> Or maybe the developers deserve more of your respect for their time?

Maybe if you have less users than developers (which is thankfully not 
the case as you can see from our statistics page). Otherwise no. See, 
this is a very very trivial change and could have been done in maybe 2 
seconds. Why are we spending so much time arguing about it? Are 
developers here somehow philosophically opposed to adding a obsolete to 
a package to make it easier for testers to update and provide feedback 
to the project?

> The end users will never see this; the testers know to expect this sort
> of thing. Anyone who expects upgrades between experimental test releases
> to work flawlessly has got their expectations seriously out of whack.

I am not expecting everything to work flawlessly. I am asking that we do 
simple things to make it easier for end users to continue updating and 
providing feedback to us.

> Here's the deal: We've committed to do the best we can to ensure that
> upgrades between major releases work and that Test3 (or, in this case,
> Test4)->final upgrades will work. Everything beyond that is
> best-effort. 
> 
> In my opinion this can be handled just fine by a Test3 release note.

As someone who argued in the Fedora QA meeting to bring in this change I 
consider ensuring upgrades from test 3 to final release as a good first 
step. We could do better in the future. There are other distributions 
like Debian which have paved the way. It is very critical especially for 
Fedora to do this because it brings in more early testers.

Have you wondered why upstream projects like GNOME which Fedora has very 
much been aligned with dont see much bug reports from Fedora rawhide 
users or why our general releases have always atleast one major 
embrassing bug? Ensuring proper update paths from even test releases 
will definitely improve the quality of the general releases.

Rahul