I think you have a valid point. However, it has been answered before that a working mkcd between releases is not a priority. In fact it appears to be a distraction to keep it working. (This last sentence is my interpretation of what I have read here.)
So, while I agree fully with your sentiment and your desire, the folks in charge are (basically) not going to worrry about this issue until sometime shortly before a release of some sort. Bob Finch On Wednesday 02 July 2003 07:26 am, Frank Griffin wrote: > Thanks, I'll make a note of the urpmi --auto-select technique, but most > of the bugs I report are with the install itself, not just with this > package or that. Without being able to do an install, those aren't > going to get reported, and I can't tell if the old ones have been fixed > (when bugzilla asks me every month). > > I fully understand that it is the nature of cooker than things break. > But some things are more critical to the intended goals of cooker than > others. If you want people to test a system install, the install has to > work at least to the point of completing and producing a bootable system. > > Have I got this backwards ? Is it really the intention to address only > application package issues in the early part of the release cycle, and > leave install issues until the betas/RCs ?
