Kevin Kofler wrote:
I am saying that SOME updates can be pushed with less or even no
testing.
This does NOT mean that testing should not be used in most cases. It just
means that it should be the maintainer's discretion whether to use it or
not. The maintainer knows best how to handle his/her package. A dumb tool
automatically enforcing some generic rules which are the same for all
packages does not. And distinguishing 2 classes of packages (critical and
non-critical) out of our thousands of packages doesn't change this in the
least.
Fedora security updates are regularly given no testing and are pushed
directly to stable. Perhaps you should classify your updates with a
severity of security.
Why should you abuse the system? Because the system is abusing you.
While I (and Kevin!) agree that testing is useful, as I became more
involved after the dbus debacle, the freedom of packagers to handle
their packages freely should be maintained. The recent upswing in
policies and requirements is clouding Fedora's vision.