fedora versus fedora test
Christopher K. Johnson
ckjohnson at gwi.net
Sat Oct 11 11:38:25 UTC 2003
Mike A. Harris wrote:
>On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Robin Green wrote:
>>(Although, admittedly, the Fedora model is to try and make changes
>>upstream only as much as posssible, for most packages. I suspect that
>I don't really see how that is any different than we do now
>though. For example, I'm not going to not fix bugs in XFree86
>because XFree86.org hasn't checked a patch into CVS. It could
>take 8-12 months for that to happen. Right now my XFree86 rpms
>have over 120 patches in them, and future builds will have more
>and more. If it didn't then what would be my job for example?
>We don't really control upstream projects much, all we can do is
>make sure to send our fixes and whatnot upstream. But we
>certainly should never wait until upstream projects apply our
>fixes and release new versions of their software in order to ship
>it. That is just silly and needless lag. The distro would never
>be stable and/or would never ship.
>Patches are and always will be needed to fix bugs.
And therein lies an essential role in providing a good distro - people who contribute to the stabilization of all the constituent parts, and the timely revision of relevant patch sets to produce viable packages as upstream changes occur.
A tip of the fedora to all of you maintainers who make quality releases possible. ;)
Chris Johnson, RHCE #807000448202021
More information about the users