On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 15:04 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> writes:
> On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 11:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The proposed policy might be workable if we had a surplus of
>> proventester manpower available, but we obviously have not got that.
> See above, you cannot judge this on current experience.
Yes I can. I have two critpath packages that are in testing with
security bugs, both pretty small and easy to test, and both still have
karma zero. That seems to me to be adequate proof that there's not the
manpower out there to do this.
Have you actually asked anyone to test it? Or even considered
*mentioning the names of the packages* so maybe someone here could help?
You're putting way more effort into complaining about testing being
required than it would actually take to get someone to perform the
required testing. I find this to be a poor use of your time and mine.
The right way to go about this is to ramp up proventester manpower
*first* before making it a required gating factor.
Chicken-and-egg problem. It turns out nobody does testing when it's
optional. So now it's not optional.
But take heart - if both packages are small and easy to test, surely
it'll be really easy to find someone to test them both.
-w