On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 15:29, Chris Chabot wrote: > To address the other point: I do feel it is a bad idea to run rawhide > packages to much on their beta system. The point of the beta is to do > public QA on that combination of packages.. Sure you can get a specific > fix from a redhat engineer's home dir or rawhide, but at large it's that > specific combination of packages that we are testing
And somehow..your binaries are better in this regard to the idea of "specific combination of packages" testing. This is where you step up and practise what you preach. Sorry, but packaging your own binaries from outside the beta tree and providing them for use here on the list while at the same time sternly warning everyone here to watch what the eat out of rawhide....rings hollow and more than a little hyprocritical. Does it matter if the binaries you rolled came from rh8.0 or rawhide? No, not if you really truely believe that argument you keep rattling on about about "specific combination" package testing. Pick a world view and stick with it, yer making my head spin. > You could also choose to test rawhide packages, thats what it is there > for, but do not confuse that with testing a redhat beta! I'll say it again... When a redhat developer like mharris responds to a phoebe bug report in redhat bugzilla with "test the new XFree86 package i just dumped into rawhide and report back to this phoebe bug report if this fixes yer bug."...how is that NOT beta testing? And again..running yer binaries lifted from rh8...has got to be worse from a QA "specific combination of packages" standpoint since they sit outside of redhat completely...i dont see a bugzilla comment from a @redhat.com addy telling beta testers to test or use these th8 based packages. You want to talk about perverting the point of testing "specific combination" of packages..take a look in the mirror. Yer packages run counter to the whole argument that there is a need to test a "specific combination" of packages from an engineering point of view. > With the beta > you can have some expectations that it might work, with rawhide you do > not. Oh i really really disagree with this...and its very dangerous to give the impression that that beta should work. the party line is and always should be...beta's don't work...have fun figuring out how it breaks. > (Have you ever read the mission statement and intent for rawhide?) > Confusing a beta testing process with the rawhide testing process, and > the miss-understanding the risks attached to either, is a bad thing for > the end-user, and for redhat. talk to the redhat developers who report back to phoebe beta bugreports with "test new packages in rawhide and report back." > Now i feel this thread should come to an end.. I try every time (though > not always in as friendly tones, see the not employed part) to explain > in detail why i'm saying this, and i see a responce with a smart wording > designed to be inflamatory.. Not something i want to spend to much time on. Clearly...at least not much time reading responses and answering the issued raised. Here is the question that you haven't answered yet about yer view of rawhide: Why do redhat developers tell bug testers to try rawhide packages and report back to the beta bugreport if your assumption that there is a strict seperation between rawhide and the beta packages during the beta phase is a trueism? And the new question: Why would running packages based on rh8 sources...be a good idea...if you really believe the notion that beta testers need to concetrate on testing a "specific combination" of packages. You spend so much time and energy writing up how important it is to stay with the predefined "beta platform" from an engineering perspective and to not mislead people into thinking its ever worth testing rawhide packages as a beta tester (contrary to what some redhat developers would have you believe in some bugreport comments), I just hate seeing you undermining your well crafted point of view by encouraging people to run packages outside of the "beta" platform. I'm worried about you, is all...I'm passionately worried about your mental well being....if it comes off as a little flamy, sorry, I'm a proponent of the tough love school of thought. -jef"end of thread...unless someone tells me yet again that rawhide packages are bad for you, but my 3rd party packages are nutritious"spaleta
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
