no ... *really* ... any ETA for updated beta?
smoogen at lanl.gov
Thu Aug 28 16:59:54 UTC 2003
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, MJang wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Gerald Henriksen" <ghenriks at rogers.com>
>> One of the issues delaying beta 2 is the move to include Gnome 2.4,
>There's an expectation that a later beta of a product will be in
>"better shape." Unfortunately, that's not fair, given the desire to
>incorporate packages such as the newest GNOME. So Red Hat has
>additional work to do.
>If Red Hat were to release a later beta that was in noticably worse
>shape, I'm sure we'd see a lot of critical media on the topic. As the
>market leader, Red Hat is held to a higher standard.
I think that was the case for the 5.0 and 6.0 Beta chains.. THere were
some bugs in a later beta and Red Hat got nothing but grief about how
shoddy they were.
Stephen John Smoogen smoogen at lanl.gov
Los Alamos National Labrador CCN-5 Sched 5/40 PH: 5-8058
Ta-03 SM-261 MailStop P208 DP 17U Los Alamos, NM 87545
-- So shines a good deed in a weary world. = Willy Wonka --
More information about the test