REVIEW/RFC: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Kevin/Updates_Policy_Draft

[Alex Hudson]

Hey Kevin,

On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 15:47 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> How can we clarify the language or the layout of the page to be more
> clear? Are there places that it could be more like the existing package
> update howto page? Could we be more detailed about what bodhi enforces
> and whats just good practice? 

I think there's one thing missing: some discussion about the guiding
principles about where these rules came from.

So, for example, we have these use cases for Fedora which involves
information working on the desktop, so the guiding principles for the
stable release ought to be about those users being generally happy and
having a desktop that is working reliably day-by-day. 

>From those types of principles, exceptions like "update clamav" and
"update to Firefox 4 because it's the only secure release" become a lot
more obvious: our users need a working secure desktop, and updates are
about the balancing act between "fixing existing problems" and "risk of
introducing new problems". 

While the various rules about karma and updates in series are really
useful, they're more like a set of codified statements about what
risk/reward ratio we think maintainers ought to be considering in order
to fix problems or introduce new features. But if we focus too hard on
them, we risk losing sight of the wood for the trees: I think they're
great for calibrating the risk, but we need to remember what the goal
actually is.

Cheers

Alex.


--
This message was scanned by Better Hosted and is believed to be clean.
http://www.betterhosted.com