On Thu, 2003-02-13 at 01:16, Chuck Burns wrote: > On Friday 14 February 2003 3:09 pm, Lea Gris wrote: > *snip* > > > > Ok, but ... > > > > How man is supposed to upgrade to 9.1 when it is out if it was not a > > fully tested process ? > > > > Aren't we supposed to test cooker and report bugs ? > > > > I think the upgrade process is *a very important feature* that *should* > > be *deeply tested* here. > > > > How are we able to get reliable upgrade process if it is not tested > > though all along the cooker maturation ? > > > > regards, > You do a FULL upgrade to cooker, making sure that ALL packages are cooker > packages..
Which begs the question. Is cooker an extension of the previous distro or is it a distro in and of itself. The former IMHO is the preferable situation and I might add the more profitable alternative. The latter yields more problems and more disgruntled users. (I'm having the same argument at work BTW.) James
