Updates Criteria Summary/Brainstorming

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 18:09 +0100, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> * Adam Miller [22/11/2010 18:03] :
> > 
> > As though swearing it will never happen is even possible to deliver? 
> 
> I believe that's Michael's whole point.
> 
> The whole 'push directly to stable' arguement rests heavily on the principle
> that an update is always better (from a QA standpoint) than whatever it's
> replacing. The problem is that there's no way to guarantee this, essentielly
> because it isn't true.

I believe Kevin would say his position is that the update is better than
what's there already *sufficiently often* that allowing unrestricted
updates is a net benefit (the question is whether an occasional bad
update is a worse problem than some updates being delayed for a week or
longer in the case of untested critpath updates).
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net