FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

[Patrice Dumas]

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 07:46:58AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 16:23 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > Because EPEL has to be very stable, so additional time spent in testing is
> > even better, for example for reasons you highlight below. I never said 
> > that packages should not go through testing in EPEL! But Fedora is another 
> > thing. 
> 
> The conclusion here is that it's OK for Fedora to be broken and unstable
> in it's releases.  I call bullshit.  It is very much not OK for this to
> happen.

You haven't read my point. I said that the difference is that hot fixes
for regressions are more likely to happen in Fedora. So I mean that
allowing hotfixes in fedora may improve its stability -- especially for
specialized packages that will never be tested by anybody else than
the maintainer. While there is little point for hot fixes in EPEL.

--
Pat