Expectation Management for Test Releases

[Gene C.]

On Tuesday 20 April 2004 16:19, Elliot Lee wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Chris Adams wrote:
> > Once upon a time, Will Backman <whb at ceimaine.org> said:
> > > I don't see how the current release process is much different from
> > > before.  I was downloading and trying Redhat Linux betas before Fedora
> > > existed.
> >
> > Before, there were several private beta releases to a controlled team
> > before any public betas were made (there were really more like 4-5 betas
> > and a release candidate or two, but only 3 public releases).  FC2 is the
> > first without that, and in some ways, it is showing.  I think the goal
> > of 3 test releases for FC2 is rather ambitious (especially with the
> > major changes of kernel 2.6 and SElinux); I'm not sure it is realistic
> > though.
>
> Some may not yet be aware that SELinux is going to be disabled by default
> for FC2. It will still be possible to install with it on, and development
> work on it will continue, but it's not ready for prime time.

Elliot ...

At this point in the FC2 development cycle I can certainly understand shipping 
with selinux disabled by default.  This is unfortunate but completely 
understandable from the time left.

In another message, Jeff Johnson mentioned that the current plan is to scrap 
the current policy packaging and "mechanism" and redesign it.

I have been inclined to run selinux=1, enforcing=1 with FC2T2.  While I hit 
problems, I found that it did mostly work.

So, my question:  For FC2 final (and really Test3 also), should those of us 
interested in selinux and willing to put up with some problem continue to 
install it enabled?  If policy is going to be redesigned, is this worth the 
effort.  Naturally, any bugs found in FC2T3 would be reported but I am not 
sure anyone will have time to address them.  Furthermore, if the plan is to 
redesign things post FC2 (planned for FC3 I assume), little attention will be 
given to bugs in this old mechanism.

What do you recommend?
-- 
Gene