On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:19:01PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On 08/19/2009 11:43 AM, Ricky Zhou wrote:
> On 2009-08-19 02:35:32 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> While I do think the mirror issue is important, I'll be honest and say the
>> 'common sense' angle that Rex mentioned earlier is what I was after
anyway.
>> I don't understand why we need to have 380 0-day updates of $new_crap.
> Ah, I did not pick this up from your original email. I don't quite get
> the common sense part either though - If we have the updates, what is
> the gain of delaying them? Would the benefit be to get the important
> updates out faster and with a less error-prone push?
>
I'm with ricky here. The original email says that we'd be saving
mirrors from having to serve both the release (packages and isos) on the
same day as it's serving the 0 day updates. But if the mirrors don't
see this as a problem, then perhaps there's no reason to do it.
Idea withdrawn.
josh