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

Michael Schwendt mschwendt at gmail.com
Fri Feb 26 20:11:07 UTC 2010

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:18:58 +0000, Matthew 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.

Brilliant strategy. =:-/  You know that the product is broken and could be
repaired, but you don't fix it till somebody is hit by the breakage actually.
That may work if it's just a single loyal Fedora user, who stays calm and
reports the issue only to Fedora. It fails completely for all users, who
find the breakage but who complain in places other than Fedora specific
sites. It results in bad publicity and comparing of distributions. And
it's extra bad in all the cases where "latest upstream release" really is
equal to "works best", based on what the software's power-users tell.

OMG, and I'm not even one who advocates the "always upgrade to latest
upstream releases quickly" way.

> > 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?

My experience differs. Not limited to Fedora, one can hear it often
that users "sit and wait" without reporting something themselves.
And not seldomly it leads to users seeking for alternative software
to do the same/similar job.

More information about the devel mailing list