Hello Chris, On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:50:35PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Ljubomir Ljubojevic <off...@plnet.rs> said: > > Do all of you even realize how many bugs Red Hat has to resolve to move > > from Fedora sources to bugs free stable product?? If you even done ANY > > programming you would understand how complicated is to solve all the > > issues popping all the time. > > Yes, I do understand that. But then I look at the differences between > beta1 and beta2 and see some significant version changes (such as > Dovecot jumping from 1.2.9 to 2.0beta8 - a beta version in RHEL?), which > should not be happening after a beta release. That indicates to me poor > project management and the possibility of an even more delayed release > (which may cause additional packages to get upgrades, causing more > delays, etc.), or a rushed release that is not stable. > > Now, I'd much prefer to see Dovecot 2.0 in a long-term release like > RHEL, but a change like that should have been made before the first > beta.
I am looking forward to how this item is handeled. Overall Red Hat has improved all updates and grown them to also include new upstream releases and then having a current dovecot in rhel6 will be great, even if major fixes then need to go into 6.1. On that front rhel6 should also be a start to not only have EPEL as addon repository, but a bigger playing ground for addon packages and bugfixes that grow within a community and are the basis for also Red Hat to push then into the product. What is the right extension to the growing Red Hat support, EPEL and how Fedora has grown? I'd recommend testing a real current Fedora dovecot ontop of rhel6beta and give feedback based on that to Red Hat. I have 2.0.4 packages uploaded to http://jur-linux.org/rpms/el-updates/6/, but haven't actually updated email-servers with this version yet. > > What I heard originally was that RHEL 6 was going to be based on Fedora > 12, which was released almost a year ago. When the first RHEL 6 beta > was released, there were a fair number of packages that looked to be > based on Fedora 13 instead, which indicates much less testing time (and > throwing away some of the Fedora-based testing, since the package mix > was changed). The second beta upgraded some packages to newer versions > that appear to be based on the Fedora 14 development tree (F14 will > reach beta next week). The releases have always pulled in new stuff and have not been only an extension to Fedora releases. Also such bigger version updates also come from personal taste and not only release procedures across all rpm packages. regards, Florian La Roche _______________________________________________ rhelv6-beta-list mailing list rhelv6-beta-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-beta-list
