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

Till Maas opensource at till.name
Fri Feb 26 19:41:07 UTC 2010

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 07:18:58PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 08:15:43PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > 1) to fix a bug or add a feature the maintainer experienced/uses
> If nobody is complaining about the bug, then fixing the bug can wait 
> until the next Fedora release.

Why even fix the bug in Fedora at all then, if the maintainer needs to
create his own sub-distro with updated packages? Also why is the
maintainer always nobody?

> > 2) As already told several times, not having people to test something
> > does not mean that the package is not used
> If they're not complaining, they're presumably happy with the current 
> state of the package?

Please come back to reality. They can also be too frustrated to report
the bug in Fedora, if it is already fixed upstream. And why should
people hit bugs again in Fedora that are already fixed upstream?

> > 3) It allows new users of the package not to find/debug the bugs again that
> > are already fixed upstream
> If they're willing to debug, why are they not willing to test?

Since the users are new, they are not yet there to test a package. But I
would also not be interested to test old packages just to find out that
the bugs I found are fixed in a newer release. And this already hit me
several times. I wanted to do something, installed the Fedora package,
found a bug, and realise that the bug is fixed in a new upstream
release. The only benefit of Fedora in this case is that I can easier
build the new package for me, because the spec is already there.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100226/aa1aaf09/attachment.bin 

More information about the devel mailing list