On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 19:39 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote:
> Yes, you bear some risk in using rawhide. There is no reward without
> risk. We can mitigate some of that risk by placing automated testing
> between the builds and the users. Some reduction in risk is far better
> than no reduction is it not? Would it not be nice to see rawhide
> reports without the huge list of broken deps? Would it not be nice to
> have a rawhide build update that doesn't segfault upon execution? These
> are the kinds of things that happen now, that AutoQA could prevent.
> That makes rawhide vastly more consumable than it currently is.
But it is no replacement for the current non-conservative updates to
releases, whereas the OP's proposal wants to drop those in favor of the
Somebody is going to have to pay the price. Either users on our
released Fedoras will have to pay the price of potentially unstable
updates coming at them, changing behavior and adding regressions, or the
users who want those kind of updates will have to pay the price of other
potentially unstable updates coming along too, changing behavior and
adding regressions. The question is who gets to suffer? Right now,
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!