On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 08:33, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Yang Xiao wrote: > > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 07:31:31 -0400 (EDT), Robert P. J. Day > > <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Edward wrote: > >> > >>> FC3 Already? > >> > >> BTW, it's nowhere near FC3, it's just FC3 test 1. check the schedule > >> at http://fedora.redhat.com/participate/schedule. the full release of > >> FC3 is slated for october. > > > > October? you mean by the time I'm done with all the upgrades I got do > > it over again? > > sigh. > > not really. no one says you have to *anything* with FC3 when it comes > out. but keep in mind that, if you choose to work with the fedora > core stream, you've implicitly agreed to deal with a fast-moving, > regularly-updated release, remember? that's the price you pay for > being out there on the edge. > > rday And I take it that they will resolve almost all (95%) of the open issues from FC2 without applying fixes (or a fix to a fix). Why move forward when you haven't resolved the old problems? Why the urgency? Let's get a solid base before moving forward otherwise there will be too many issues unresolved or FEDORA will jeopardize their good name and will turn a lot of other people who were undecided and go after another developer. Is that what you want? MAYBE - FEDORA should go the route of SOURCEFORGE and their CVS route. At this rate of change - why not start creating application RPM folders that will contain e.g. mozilla, xorg and the likes, for upgrades since you guys will know what changes there have been made, and organizations like mozilla, xorg ,etc... can concentrate on their own application upgrades rather then trying to keep up to your changes. Because you guys have tested them out before each release, haven't you. Chris Cz (who will remain a newbie at this rate)
