<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 05/29/2012 06:13 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:jq33fi$7ru$1@dough.gmane.org" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre wrap=""><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>It makes no sense to have a gui application ( or an application for that
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>matter ) without having written the relevant how to debug/how to test
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>pages for each component to accommodate it.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Indeed. However, I'd argue <b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>both<span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> pieces, a karma app and good test-cases,
are needed, and one not need block on the other.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Well we then agree on disagreeing since updating the component and
running the relevant application is hardly what I call testing and
requiring karma points to just do that makes absolutely no sense to
me. <br>
<br>
This whole scenario is a bit more complicated than that and me and
James did discuss few ideas to solve this when he was with the
project but things did not progress any further than that for
various reasons including the FPC/FESCO decisions to make things
optional instead of mandatory. <br>
<br>
For security updates arguably we should be having faith in
maintainers actually eating and testing their own food and use a
time based limit instead of karma based as in after x many days in
updates testing and no reporter has reported any problem the update
gets pushed regardless of it's karma. <br>
<br>
In any case this is something we solve in the QA community and
arguably we should be the one that decide all this and FPC just
implements what we have decided and tell them to. <br>
<br>
This really does not involve Fesco and we already have a good
working relationship with releng. <br>
<br>
JBG<br>
</body>
</html>