On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Kevin Kofler (kevin.kofler(a)chello.at) said:
>> For most bugfixes, the user doesn't notice at all. When a user gets a
>> bugfix on something they've hit, they think "oh, that's nice, Fedora
fixed
>> it", but they don't really care whether it cam Monday or Friday. For
every
>> regression they hit, they think "ARRGH, this Fedora crap. All I did is
>> update and now it's broken and I can't do what I want!" The impact
on the
>> user's productivity and attitude isn't the same, and they can't be
treated
>> the same.
>
> One thing to consider: while from a psychological standpoint, a regression
> is indeed perceived as much worse than an unfixed bug, from a technical /
> practical standpoint it's actually the smaller issue: you can rollback to
> the version of the package before the regression, you can't rollback an
> unfixed bug as there's nothing to roll back to!
Given that we don't provide an easily accessible user-friendly rollback
mechanism, I don't know that that's actually applicable to the general case,
though.
yum history undo works pretty well. Not flawless, to be sure - but it's
not bad for the simple-ish cases.
-sv