Suggestion with respect to the Fedora Update System

[G]

>  > If you take the enhancement mentioned in the mail , i dont have any
>  > clue on how to proceed and that makes it difficult. Probably a note
>  > atleast on what to be tested could obviously make a difference and
>  > that atlteast should be mandatory i feel.

Ok but for some packages some testers have responded saying "It works
for me " some people have told it does not work me " . If you look at
these 2 statements, its contradicting, thats point one and the next
one is "It" is still undefined for other testers :). My suggestion is
why cannot we define "It" as a test case or an enhancement atleast. I
sincerely feel that it would make a big difference.

Probably we could review our updates system and try adding a field
which gives more info.I  also strongly feel that it would help our
contributors in a real positive way.


Cheers,
Balaji


On 5/29/08, Till Maas <opensource at till.name> wrote:
> On Thu May 29 2008, "G" wrote:
>
>  > If you take the enhancement mentioned in the mail , i dont have any
>  > clue on how to proceed and that makes it difficult. Probably a note
>  > atleast on what to be tested could obviously make a difference and
>  > that atlteast should be mandatory i feel.
>
>
> Often it will be enough just to use the application a little to provide
>  feedback, e.g. as long as the application does not crash or corrupt some
>  data, then the update is good enough most of the times imho.
>
>  Regards,
>
> Till
>
> --
>  fedora-devel-list mailing list
>  fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>
>