Is It Worth Installing F9 Alpha?

[David Timms]

Scott Robbins wrote:
> Now, for me to report this bug, and for it to be worthwhile, I'd have to
> install the alpha on a second machine and see if I can reproduce it.
> This was an install off of the live CD.  For me to feel justified
> reporting it, I'd also want to install off the DVD and possibly a few
> test installs of other live CDs, e.g., KDE and the like. 
I think that repeatability with the original machine is useful. That 
might involve uninstalling a package, removing config customizations, 
and then reinstall, test, customize config, test. This helps to discern 
whether it was a one-time issue, or related to the specific config 
performed.

Before creating a bug entry, check that updating to current updates 
hasn't already fixed the problem.

One way to do the A/B machine comparison is to run the test instance in 
a virtual machine. {eg vmware-server - watch the installer 
misconfiguring the selinux on /etc/services - and others}.

> So, I don't report this bug, I don't want to waste the time of the
> developers, especially when I see that no one else has mentioned it
More reason to actually create the bug. It is thoroughly impossible to 
fix a bug that no one has reported ;-)
Even if it gets marked cant/wont fix - at least further people searching 
for that issue can see the status, usually along with a description of 
why it was marked that way - and hence not create another bug.

> Nor do I post about it here, as this is a busy list, and again, I've
> seen no one else mention it.  (I'm simply posting about it now as an
> example of a bug that I've experienced, and not reported.)
The Fedora people always say: stick it in bugzilla. Make sure you search 
for it before adding a duplicate.

 From the alpha/beta/rc changes, I get the impression that alpha is 
'raw'er than test1 used to be.

DaveT.