F12 0-day release updates

[Josh Boyer]

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:19:01PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>On 08/19/2009 11:43 AM, Ricky Zhou wrote:
>> On 2009-08-19 02:35:32 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>> While I do think the mirror issue is important, I'll be honest and say the
>>> 'common sense' angle that Rex mentioned earlier is what I was after anyway.
>>> I don't understand why we need to have 380 0-day updates of $new_crap.
>> Ah, I did not pick this up from your original email.  I don't quite get
>> the common sense part either though - If we have the updates, what is
>> the gain of delaying them?  Would the benefit be to get the important
>> updates out faster and with a less error-prone push?
>> 
>I'm with ricky here.  The original email says that we'd be saving
>mirrors from having to serve both the release (packages and isos) on the
>same day as it's serving the 0 day updates.  But if the mirrors don't
>see this as a problem, then perhaps there's no reason to do it.

Idea withdrawn.

josh