On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 16:20, Craig White wrote: > > > > Sorry, I'm just posting my observations. I did ramble on a bit too > > much about it, but my only complaint is about continuing to distribute > > known bugs (and then not liking the bug reports...). > ---- > but every release has known bugs - even updates that fix certain bugs > contain other known bugs so the updates only fix specific known bugs and > if you understand the theory behind Linux releases - I like to refer to > Eric Raymond's 'the Cathedral and the Bazaar' - the point is to release > early and often and have the community help identify and sometimes > provide the solution to bugs. Yes, I tried to point out that I was not complaining about the bugs in the initial release and that I don't generally expect waiting for the next release to be the right thing either. > In short though - the reason that your desire about a 're-spin' of the > ISO's is that all the known bugs aren't fixed - only some of them are > fixed - and and this isn't about perfection, only advancement. Yet in the releases before 9, someone at RH was able to make a reasonable guess at when there was enough advancement to cut a point release and historically, the X.2 versions were pretty good. > You > certainly are welcome to 're-spin' the core release yourself or organize > a group of people to help if it seems important enough to do it. So far the machines I manage that run fedora have decent internet connections and I can update after the install. And I usually start from the k12ltsp cut anyway which is a little bit ahead. I don't think that's the case for everyone, though. > yeah and using this user list as a forum for fedora-development issues > isn't as productive as pissing in the wind since pissing in the wind > will at least empty your bladder. It's not really what I think of as development. Is there a fedora-packager or iso-builder list? -- Les Mikesell les@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
