2007/11/27, Adam Tkac <atkac@redhat.com>:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:24:48PM -0500, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> > Fedora 8 shipped with an BIND 9.5.0a6, recently updated to 9.5.0a7.
> > The release announcement for BIND says:
> >
> > BIND 9.5.0a7 is a alpha release for BIND 9.5.0.
> >
> > This is a technology preview of new functionality to be be
> > released in BIND 9.5.0. New APIs are not yet frozen.
> >
> > Is this an appropriate release to be putting in a stable Fedora
> > release? I've encounted a segfault in this version, which I've
> > reported here:
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=400461
> >
> > I'm concerned about the policies which allow unstable software in
> > stable Fedora releases. Is it considered acceptable/encouraged to
> > have alpha versions of software in the stable release? Is there any
> > policy?
> >
> > Thanks.
>
> I've put this software to F8 because it has nice new features. Some
> bugs is tax for them. Additionally I don't think that users use newest
> Fedora on important servers and 9.5 will come into beta stage very
> soon.
>
> Adam
>
> >
> > --
> > fedora-devel-list mailing list
> > fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>
> --
> Adam Tkac, Red Hat, Inc.

Hey,

I understand why you choose to include it but i don't really like it.
If i run a server i want to have the latest _stable_ releases and
certainly no alpha (BIND) beta or even a build (NetworkManager)! now i
can imagine that desktop applications that aren't in a final release
can get pushed in Fedora because it simply has some nice additions
that you don't want your users to miss. But BIND is a vital part of a
server (DNS Server) so i think you shouldn't include beta's or even
alpha's of that in final releases of Fedora.

And you say:
> Fedora has new features and new features mean bugs so you
> cannot expect such stability like RHEL.

Oke i understand that. BUT the fact that you do push a vital server
component that is in alpha in Fedora does imply that you are testing
it on fedora for RHEL! (which in term keeps your other statement
standing).

Fedora is used for servers (which you as a redhat employee probably
know) but in the mean time it's purpose is mainly a desktop OS. I
would say that:
- All server components like Sendmail, DNS, Apache, MySQL, PostgreSQL
etc.. should stay up to date with there latest _stable_ release (no
alpha's, beta's or rc's)
- All desktop related applications can probably be less tight.. I
don't see a problem there for alpha's, beta's or rc's.. as long as the
applications itself don't crash and just work.

That's just my point of view as a fedora desktop and (previously) server user.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Nov 27, 2007 1:41 PM, Mark <markg85@gmail.com> wrote:
> - All desktop related applications can probably be less tight.. I
> don't see a problem there for alpha's, beta's or rc's.. as long as the
> applications itself don't crash and just work.

I think a concept of how capable the maintainer is to address bugs as
downstream patches needs to be factored in as well. And how early in
the process in the testing process the pre-release versions showed up
into the testing tree.

We've had dbus in fedora for a few releases now.. well before its api
was nailed down and considered stable.. haven't we? It's not a
critical server service.. nor is it a desktop application itself..but
it does critically affect the desktop experience since multiple
desktop components rely on dbus.

In the future it might be beneficial to raise a big stink about
pre-release stuff which is being considered in the release as we march
through the testing process. If a maintainer feels comfortable
releasing an alpha component or application then we need to make sure
that we have a reasonable way for testers to see it coming down the
pipe and have an opportunity to beat the snot out of that component as
part of Fedora testing. I don't think its unreasonable to give
testers a heads up about pre-release stuff so they can prioritize how
they spend time testing before a Fedora release.


-jef

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Adam Tkac (atkac@redhat.com) said:
> I've put this software to F8 because it has nice new features.

Really? Are our users clamoring for features *in bind* so much that we
should push an *alpha* version to released updates?

Heck, if so, let's just push all of GNOME 2.21 and xorg-1.4.99 into
F8 updates too.

If we want to get testing on it, and it's going into beta soon, put
it in rawhide. Maybe put it in updates-testing. Don't push it into
updates-stable; wait for an actual release for that.

Bill

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

2007/11/27, Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com>:
Adam Tkac (atkac@redhat.com) said:
> I've put this software to F8 because it has nice new features.

Really? Are our users clamoring for features *in bind* so much that we

should push an *alpha* version to released updates?

Heck, if so, let's just push all of GNOME 2.21 and xorg-1.4.99 into
F8 updates too.

If we want to get testing on it, and it's going into beta soon, put

it in rawhide. Maybe put it in updates-testing. Don't push it into
updates-stable; wait for an actual release for that.

Bill

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list

fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Bill answer is true.

this must been use polity.



Oscar

XanKha
Linux De La Costa.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Nov 27, 2007 6:58 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> wrote:
> Adam Tkac (atkac@redhat.com) said:
> > I've put this software to F8 because it has nice new features.
>
> Really? Are our users clamoring for features *in bind* so much that we
> should push an *alpha* version to released updates?

Uhm i dont think this started with the latest update... i think the
version released in f8 was also a pre-release.

-jef

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Jeff Spaleta (jspaleta@gmail.com) said:
> > Really? Are our users clamoring for features *in bind* so much that we
> > should push an *alpha* version to released updates?
>
> Uhm i dont think this started with the latest update... i think the
> version released in f8 was also a pre-release.

I stand correct. I still don't feel it's appropriate for a released
tree when in the alpha state - after all, the current supported release
of bind was made in July - that's not that long ago.

Bill

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

>>>>> "TC" == Tom "spot" Callaway <Tom> writes:

TC> Such as? Open to suggestions here.

We had
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MaintainerResponsibilityPolicy
which was never finished; the only thing in there is "Maintain
stability for users". I honestly don't see how you can be much more
specific without introducing needless bureaucracy. After all, the
alpha releases of some projects are more stable then the full releases
of others.

- J<

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 11/28/2007 06:56 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:

"TC" == Tom "spot" Callaway <Tom> writes:


TC> Such as? Open to suggestions here.

We had
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MaintainerResponsibilityPolicy
which was never finished; the only thing in there is "Maintain
stability for users". I honestly don't see how you can be much more
specific without introducing needless bureaucracy. After all, the
alpha releases of some projects are more stable then the full releases
of others.


This seems pretty much perfect, actually. What does it need in order to
be "finished"?


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 11:41:13PM +0100, Mark wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> I understand why you choose to include it but i don't really like it.
> If i run a server i want to have the latest _stable_ releases and
> certainly no alpha (BIND) beta or even a build (NetworkManager)! now i
> can imagine that desktop applications that aren't in a final release
> can get pushed in Fedora because it simply has some nice additions
> that you don't want your users to miss. But BIND is a vital part of a
> server (DNS Server) so i think you shouldn't include beta's or even
> alpha's of that in final releases of Fedora.
>
> And you say:
> > Fedora has new features and new features mean bugs so you
> > cannot expect such stability like RHEL.
>
> Oke i understand that. BUT the fact that you do push a vital server
> component that is in alpha in Fedora does imply that you are testing
> it on fedora for RHEL! (which in term keeps your other statement
> standing).
>
> Fedora is used for servers (which you as a redhat employee probably
> know) but in the mean time it's purpose is mainly a desktop OS. I
> would say that:
> - All server components like Sendmail, DNS, Apache, MySQL, PostgreSQL
> etc.. should stay up to date with there latest _stable_ release (no
> alpha's, beta's or rc's)
> - All desktop related applications can probably be less tight.. I
> don't see a problem there for alpha's, beta's or rc's.. as long as the
> applications itself don't crash and just work.
>
> That's just my point of view as a fedora desktop and (previously) server user.

>From BIND changelog:
* Tue Jun 19 2007 Adam Tkac <atkac redhat com> 31:9.5.0a5-1

It means BIND lives in rawhide/F8 about five months and I have
reported only one more serious issue (#400461, that is why this thread
was started). I believe that "a" word appended to version feels people
with dread but I have to say not in this case. I'm ready to downgrade
F8 BIND to latest stable but I can't see any argument why. One bug?
Because it is alpha? These are not arguments whose could controvert my
opinion that it was good decision put 9.5 to F8

Adam

>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

--
Adam Tkac, Red Hat, Inc.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 12:30:10AM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Jeff Spaleta (jspaleta@gmail.com) said:
> > > Really? Are our users clamoring for features *in bind* so much that we
> > > should push an *alpha* version to released updates?
> >
> > Uhm i dont think this started with the latest update... i think the
> > version released in f8 was also a pre-release.
>
> I stand correct. I still don't feel it's appropriate for a released
> tree when in the alpha state - after all, the current supported release
> of bind was made in July - that's not that long ago.
>
> Bill

As I wrote above I disagree with you that put alpha (which will come
to beta really soon) to F8 is bad decision "because it is alpha". I
tested it and I didn't find any issues. That's why I decided put 9.5
to F8.

Adam

>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

--
Adam Tkac, Red Hat, Inc.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list