Re: ITP seahorse
For the test cycles, it makes no sense that vendors should commit to
something which has a two-week life. They are "official" only in the
sense that they are identical for all testers so testing is useful.
If the test images are a joke, then obviously they will not become the
release. Presumably, exactly what gets tested will be what gets released
at the conclusion of a successful test cycle?
On 2000-05-23 at 15:00 -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> I think more importantly we need criteria for what "Official" images are
> when we release. The last run for test cycle 1 is a joke. They were
> obviously not checked or tested, and we potentially have vendors out there
> getting ready to use them, not to mention users who take up some valuable
> b/w and gold platters.
> I think images need to have detached sigs in order to be considered
> official. Signed by the DPL, or Release Manager, either one should do. Can
> we get some sort of *QUICK* and *OFFICIAL* consensus on this?