Fedora Board Recap 2009-12-17 UTC 1700

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 11:31:05 -0500,
  William Jon McCann <william.jon.mccann at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> experience was a "red herring."  It was also stated that the Fedora
> project thinks a broken rawhide is not only a necessity due to lack of
> QA resources but also desirable because it follows from our goals of
> being first and fast.  It was also stated that since we have a

I find it hard to believe that anyone claimed that a broken rawhide in itself
is a desireable thing.

There are also different causes of brokenness. Some is brokenness within
a package or small set of packages because of sloppiness. That shouldn't
really be happening and is definitely not desireable. Some is caused by
a change in a subsystem used by a lot of stuff without all of the dependencies
also getting updated. This isn't really desireable either. Some ways of
avoiding this situation have been discussed, but there can be conflicts
between getting the new feature in, having packagers need to jump into
action quickly to support such changes and doing the push without having
all of the dependencies updated.

> community to test rawhide and give us feedback when it is broken we
> don't have to test it beforehand.  It was also stated that we've moved

Except this takes time away from people who could be doing development instead
of testing. I have been doing lots of testing of broken stuff this past
week or so, instead of getting some development tasks and personal stuff
done.