QA's Package update policy proposal
al.dunsmuir at sympatico.ca
Wed Mar 10 22:50:17 UTC 2010
On Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 8:09:40 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Jesse Keating wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 16:08 -0800, Josh Stone wrote:
>>> It seems to cast doubt on the value of karma -- just because something
>>> gets lots of positive karma on N doesn't mean that N-1 is ok. Then
>>> again, the same concern is present in any grouped update if the voters
>>> haven't tried *all* of the packages mentioned.
>> Even if you put an update for N and N-1 in the same form, once you
>> submit the request it splits it into two requests, one per Fedora
>> release. This means you'd have one set of karma per Fedora release.
> Indeed, and I'd argue that this is a problem, not a feature. If an update is
> confirmed to fix an issue in the current stable release and the previous
> stable release is affected by the exact same issue, I don't see a good
> reason not to push the update with identical changes to the previous stable
> release as well. Not doing it would result in the previous stable release
> not getting bugfixes in a timely manner, if at all, anymore, as it has a lot
> fewer testers.
> Kevin Kofler
Just to be clear, I am in the "adventurous user" camp that would
prefer to have the bug fix retrofitted to the older release. I would,
however, qualify that as follows:
The update to an older stable release should be made widely available
in that release's updates-testing after the equivalent (not
necessarily identical) fix has been widely tested in the latest stable
release. To me, this means separately developer unit tested, tested by
users in updates-testing and then for several weeks of real user use
In parallel with that, separate developer unit testing of the older
release should be done, with entry to the older release
updates-testing only after the original fix has been proven in the
latest stable release.
This minimizes the risk that due to a different execution environment,
build environment, configuration or whatever the seemingly equivalent
fix does not work but causes a regression. You may start at the same
place in the older stable release, but may end up down and entirely
different rabbit hole.
Firing off the "same" fix for multiple targets other than rawhide and
the latest release makes me nervous.
So to summarize, fixes in multiple releases yes, but with separate
schedules for build and testing.
More information about the devel