New schedule for FC5 Test2 ISO roll-out?
canfield at uindy.edu
Wed Jan 11 14:14:00 UTC 2006
Peter Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 17:26 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>> Now whether or not fc5t1 counts as a "release" is debatable on many
>> different levels.
> No, it's very much not. alpha/beta/test have never been guaranteed (or
> at all expected) to update perfectly from one to the next, and never
> Absolutely, no way. We've got enough work to do without being this
> incredibly crazy.
Maybe I'll be laughed off the list, but I do think it would be great if
a *goal* (not a requirement) of at least test3 of a given release would
be to upgrade to final. Might help get a bit more testing on more
diverse hardware if there wasn't the expectation that we will likely
have to re-install a few weeks later.
Similarly, it would be nice if there were some notes between test
releases (and final) pointing out any changes that might not have been
handled by rpm -Fvh. Especially important new packages, configs that
might not be upgraded etc. A few times in the past (mainly with RHL
more than FC) I've installed a test3, and although the upgrade to final
seems OK, I start panicking that there's something important I've
missed. Yes, I'm slightly neurotic. :-)
More information about the test