Why was a kernel-2.6.34 pushed to updates that had un-addressed bugs.

[pbrobinson at gmail.com]

On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Rodd Clarkson <rodd at clarkson.id.au> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 11:00 +1000, Rodd Clarkson wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Why was kernel-2.6.34.x pushed to updates in f13 when three people had
>> > reported suspend issues with the kernel and no attempt was made to
>> > address these issues.
>> >
>> > see:  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=615560
>> >
>> > I
>> > Rodd
>>
>> Because there are always suspend issues, kernel team doesn't consider
>> suspend problems a blocker for release.
>
> Sure, my problem lies not it that fact that there are suspend issues, but in
> that no attempt was even made to address the suspend issues.
>
> My system suspends and resumes fine on f13 with the 2.6.33 kernels, so it
> isn't unreasonable to expect this functionality to continue on a stable
> release.

On the other hand the 2.6.34 kernel has made my F-13 laptop 100% more
usable than the entire release. I've been having massive issues and
I've been actually meaning to reinstall F-12 but haven't actually had
the time to do so. It got pushed from updates-testing to updates very
quickly because a lot of people tested it before it even hit
updates-testing and hence got the karma required to go through to
updates very quickly.

Peter