The new Update Acceptance Criteria are broken

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 17:22 -0500, Luke Macken wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 11:46:36AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 14:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > 
> > > It's absolutely crystal clear to me that we don't have enough tester
> > > manpower to make the current policy workable; it's past time to stop
> > > denying that.  I'd suggest narrowing the policy to a small number of
> > > critical packages, for which there might be some hope of it actually
> > > working as designed.
> > 
> > BTW, another point worth noting is that there is not actually a specific
> > rule against +1ing your own updates. It's 'frowned upon', I guess, but
> > actually I think it's probably workable to say it's fine for the
> > developer to +1 their own update in Bodhi: *as long as you actually have
> > tested it*. For non-critpath updates especially. The Bodhi system is
> > essentially an honor system anyway. So how I'd see this working is if it
> > becomes clear that some maintainer is gaming the system by just +1ing
> > everything they submit, even if it actually turns out to be broken, we
> > look at saying they can't +1 their own updates any more. But if you
> > actually are conscientiously testing your own updates, that's probably
> > worth a +1 in Bodhi, for me.
> 
> The ability to +1 your own updates was disapproved by FESCo, and will be
> disabled in a future version of bodhi.
> 
> https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/277

hum, that wasn't well publicised, and I wasn't aware of it. (I should
probably show up to more FESCo meetings...picture FESCo members going
'no, no, really, it's fine!') I'd disagree, for the reasons above.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net