On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 14:22 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> * Try and test in a reasonably user-ish environment, not your
> customized one; if this means using a separate user account or a VM, do
Note about this second bullet: I'm not sure this is good advice. There's
been quite a few times I've encountered bugs in end-user oriented programs
where deleting the config files in my home directory made the bug
"disappear". Similarly, I remember there was a bind update a few releases
back where the package was trying to rewrite the existing config files which
failed when the update was attempted on boxes that had already customized
I see what you're trying to get at here but I think what it really boils
down to is -- "you should have two sets of eyes look at this." So perhaps,
upping the karma requirement to +2 and letting maintainers +1 their own
updates helps here.
That wasn't quite what I was getting at, but you have a point - both
environments can expose bugs. What I was getting at is that developers
tend to test in their own 'messy' environments anyway, so the thing they
usually *miss* is testing in a more user-y environment. So perhaps
advise maintainers to test both.
2) If the maintainer happens to be a proventester, then they only
find a regular user to give the other karma point.
...or, as we're discussing in another thread branch, the maintainer
*will* be a proven tester because they're a maintainer :)
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org