Testing test releases: do not update (was: yum.conf that works)

[Jason Knight]

I couldn't thave said it better myself, I believe this is a simple case 
of a little effort now a whole lot less effort later. This would make 
much more sense.

Robert P. J. Day wrote:

>and for those who think it's too much work for red hat to do it this way,
>i submit that it's exactly the opposite.  when there's a test release out 
>in the wild, red hat should be spending their time dealing with bug 
>reports that represent things that are just flat out *broken*.  not stuff 
>from rawhide, not RFEs, not wish lists.  they should be focused on fixing 
>stuff that's broken, and that means restricting their attention to just 
>those things so that the testers' time is well spent.  and that means not 
>having to deal with rawhide.  there should be a *separate* update channel 
>purely for fixing broken things.  and, no, i don't care if it takes red 
>hat a few more minutes to set this up.  it's not about *them*, it's about 
>making the testers' time as productive as possible.  but wait, there's 
>more.
>
>  
>
This would be excellent as well, maybe this would be taken under the 
wing of the documentation project?

>anyway, what would be nice is if there was a real and comprehensive 
>document for testers, explaining how releases work, how to query bugs, how 
>to report bugs and so on.  and by "comprehensive", i mean something a 
>little more meaty than "file bugs at bugzilla against your current 
>release."  
>
>i'm convinced that the testing procedure deserves an update repo, and i'm 
>just as convinced that that repo shouldn't be rawhide.
>  
>
-- 
Jason Knight
Fedora Core 1 Test 1 *x86_64*