On Tue, 2 Nov 2010, Frank Griffin wrote: > Tux99 wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Nov 2010, Frank Griffin wrote: > > > > > >> Weak point: > >> > >> Unless you are prepared to do full intensive QA on the updated distro, > >> the quality of these updated ISOs can be significantly lower than the > >> quality of the original release ISO. Since it will look, for all > >> intents and purposes, like the release ISO, that level of quality will > >> be what people expect of it. > >> > > Nonsense. The normal updates are not any more unstable than the original > > release, rather the contrary. > > > > I suggest you review MDV's release procedures. Full releases and > security updates go through formal QA. Backports are often not even > tested by the person building the rpm.
Backports? Who is talking about backports? We are talking about normal security and bug-fix updates here. > And they get addressed through updates which themselves go through QA. Exactly, that's why it make sense to release an updated iso with them included.
