<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Jeff Spaleta <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jspaleta@gmail.com">jspaleta@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 7:25 AM, yersinia <<a href="mailto:yersinia.spiros@gmail.com">yersinia.spiros@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Look interesting from a QA point of view.<br>
<br>
</div>How exactly is this interesting from a QA pov in Fedora? Smolt<br>
profiles I can understand being useful for QA because it gives us some<br>
ability to look for commonalities when troubleshooting hardware<br>
problems. I'm really not sure what installed packaging information<br>
gives up in terms of helping any QA process. Care to explain your<br>
thoughts on this?<br>
<br></blockquote><div><span id="result_box" class="long_text"><span title="">Sure, I can try. </span><span style="" title="">If one software is used many time from many user, directly or indirectly, and it have not such many problems
(e.g bug open on bugzilla for example ), well this could guide to the decision of the goodness of the software and the need to
delete it or not if the maintainer does not believe to support it yet. </span><span title="">Conversely,
if software is not used - directly or indirectly - this could
facilitate the decision to remove it, in the event that this possibility emerge. In general </span><span title="">it depends on what someone thing of what it is the QA of a distribution: finding bugs, automate the process of finding bugs is one thing. </span><span title="">But not alone. But it s only a personal opinion.<br>
<br>Regards<br></span></span><br></div></div><br>