On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:53 PM, David Sommerseth <sl+us...@lists.topphemmelig.net> wrote: > > Not going to argue that this could have been done better, I agree with you > here. On the other hand, maybe *that* is one reason it takes time to get this > issue resolved too? That Red Hat QE is working on improving the situation, > adding needed regression tests and so on for this use case. I know I'm > speculating now, but I also know that these guys really do their best to avoid > painful experiences for users and customers. Unfortunately, they do mistakes > - as we all do from time to time.
Given the https://git.centos.org/blobdiff/rpms!bind.git/d56ed2d3a2736a07a09c268f3b2607cca8f1b6ca/SOURCES!named-chroot.service commit, there's probably a lot of hype in RH's QA marketing claims. I'm not implying that there's no QA at all but, in this case, if there was any, it sucked.
