Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 20th Jul 2006 17:45 UTC, submitted by lh8
Will Woods, the new test lead for the Fedora Project, has only been in his position a few weeks, but already he has a clear goal in mind. Whenever Fedora is mentioned on Slashdot, he notes, "There's always someone who will comment that Fedora is just Red Hat's beta test for Red Hat Enterprise Linux. It's not true, and I want no one to have cause to say that ever again."
Thread beginning with comment 145113
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-06
I would just like to confirm that 23 months of resistance to adding basic sanity checking to prevent database corruption to the package manager is a perfectly acceptable QA policy in your book.
As explained by multiple people in the bug report, the RPM database was not corrupt. If the user had asked I'm sure they would have explained how add the entries for the packages that had been "removed." But the user didn't, they called people names and generally annoyed the developer.
And, FYI, if the software works according to the spec, it does pass QA in my book since that is the definition of passing QA.
And so is failing to respond for 5 months as long as another distro has the same problem.
So it's your opinion that Red Hat should personally maintain all of the packages they distribute? Do you expect the same from every distro? Because the developer was quite clear in the bug, he didn't have time to deal with it and it was an upstream bug. Of course, your simply dodging the point which is that that bug report does not in any way indicate that Red Hat treats Fedora like it's a "perpetual beta." Or, it supports the assertion that all distos treat their distro like it's a "perpetual beta." And, FYI, I can assure you that even with an RHEL support contract you would have ended up with the same response on that bug, it's an upstream issue and it'll get dealt with later.
And failing to ever respond at all is OK as long as not *all* radeon users are locked at 640x480.
Ah, now I'm sure you just have a reading comprehension problem. I say 1%, you say all. I mean, even the non math majors among us could see how 1% == all. Obviously. And I'm sure that the X developers have nothing better to do than to help a dozen people figure out how to correctly configure X. I mean, it's not like there aren't hundreds or even thousands of people using FC5 with a radeon card quite successfully. I must be imagining that I am not only using a radeon card at a higher res than 640x480, I'm using Xinerama at 3200x1200.
I'd just like you to sign off on that.
You are a really bad, dumb troll.