Update notification period change

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 04/05/2011 08:23 PM, James Laska wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-03-18 at 10:29 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> Hey, folks. So, just wanted to kick off a discussion regarding this bug:
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=688305
>>
>> The default update notification period has been changed for GNOME in F15
>> from 1 day to 1 week (security updates still get notifications
>> immediately). This is a change that's come from upstream, the GNOME
>> design team, who consider it a UI design issue. QA and FPL think this is
>> at least partly a distro policy issue as well as / more than a UI design
>> issue, and think we should consider whether we actually want to make
>> this change for Fedora, and if so whether we should have a different
>> update period for the pre-release cycle. QA certainly feels that 1 day
>> is more appropriate than 1 week during pre-release time.
>>
>> We chatted a bit about this during the blocker review meeting today, but
>> all agreed this would be a more appropriate venue for discussion, so I
>> wanted to kick off a thread. :) Thoughts?
> Have there been any decisions on this topic

I agree with upstream on this a week notice with 1 day notice of 
security updates for GA.

With regards to us ( QA ) I dont see the reason for why we should differ 
from this rule since.

A)
     Reporters should use yum from cli to update during the development 
cycle of the release regardless of *DE and application settings 
preferably run it manually on daily bases.

B)
     Reporters are already affected by mirror latency with regards to 
updates.

If we are going to make exception to this or any other update rule an 
*De/application might have during our development cycle I think we 
should make sure that all reporters are using the same bits at the same 
time as in skip mirrors during development cycle as well but whether we 
have enough bandwith to support that that is something that 
infrastructure needs answer.

JBG