<p>Sounds like it might need to be. Maybe push stable requests with -2 karma to some list that requires investigation and possibly a +3 (or other agreed upon number) proventesters karma to go stable?</p>
<p>Just a thought.</p>
<p>-AdamM (From Android)</p>
<p><blockquote type="cite">On Jun 25, 2010 6:27 PM, "Jesse Keating" <<a href="mailto:jkeating@redhat.com">jkeating@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br><br>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>
Hash: SHA1<br>
<br>
Can anybody tell me what went wrong with this update? It was submitted<br>
at 15:09 on 06-23, then made it into testing at 16:19 on 06-24 and was<br>
submitted for stable two hours later. Between that submission and the<br>
push to stable (push to stable happened at 18:09 on 06-25) numerous<br>
negative karma came in due to broken deps. The update went out anyway,<br>
and now we have a mess of broken updates on a critical path package, and<br>
have to scramble to fix it with more updates, on a Friday.<br>
<br>
Can anybody help me understand the scenario here? Should we start<br>
filtering out push requests that have more than -2 karma?<br>
<br>
- --<br>
Jesse Keating<br>
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!<br>
<a href="http://identi.ca" target="_blank">identi.ca</a>: <a href="http://identi.ca/jkeating" target="_blank">http://identi.ca/jkeating</a><br>
<br>
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)<br>
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - <a href="http://enigmail.mozdev.org/" target="_blank">http://enigmail.mozdev.org/</a><br>
<br>
iEYEARECAAYFAkwlO0cACgkQ4v2HLvE71NXVxwCfS59qPC/vUPT1rEIMrhMRijDL<br>
C9gAnj8FKdjdPHqL4lZPFWiAMKWsEXma<br>
=OHPB<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
<font color="#888888">--<br>
devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:devel@lists.fedoraproject.org">devel@lists.fedoraproject.org</a><br>
<a href="https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel" target="_blank">https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel</a><br>
</font></blockquote></p>