Bodhi critical path updates policy adjustment

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 16:10 +0100, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On 02/02/2012 05:18 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> We'll keep it around, but I'll update the wiki pages to note that
> >> it's kinda 'dormant' for now. I'm hoping that with Bodhi 2.0
> >> we'll be able to re-design the process and utilize proventesters
> >> in a better way.
> > 
> > How about just requiring 1 proventester +1 *or* 2 regular +1s
> > instead of the current "any 2" or the previous "1+1" rule? A
> > proventester should be trusted, so why require a second +1 if the
> > first one was from a proventester?
> > 
> +1
> 
> That does seem like a reasonable way of weighting proventester input,
> for now.

It's up to FESCo. I don't think they wanted one-person approvals in
general, though, whether proventester or not.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net