On Tue, 2004-02-10 at 04:30, Colin Charles wrote: > On Sun, 2004-02-08 at 09:52, Bart Martens wrote: > > No, "testing" is not the place for security updates. When the security > > updates are released for rh9, the security updates for fc1 should > > already have gone through "testing", and be released to the public. > > What happens when updates-testing software breaks your production > environment? > > Let fedora updates itself, be "stable", and well-tested. If you'd like > to help QA updates-testing, I suggest upgrading to updates-testing, and > filing bug reports if you find errors or nuances. I fully agree with you that (security) updates must be thoroughly tested before they are released in Fedora Updates. However, as already explained in this thread by others, security updates must not be publicly tested. By suggesting to use Proposed Fedora Updates for security updating, you suggest the average user to use all packages in Proposed Fedora Updates. You said it, "what happens when updates-testing software breaks your production environment". :-) Let's not confuse/mix security updates with other updates. Fedora needs people in the non-public groups addressing security issues, to get security updates released in Fedora Updates simultaneously with other Linux distro's, without public testing. I don't know how Red Hat wants this handed over to community people.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
