FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at freenet.de
Sat Feb 27 05:03:26 UTC 2010

On 02/27/2010 12:43 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 10:55 -0500, Paul Wouters wrote:
>> I requested a direct push to stable. Which was denied. I was unhappy that
>> we would not stop a DOS attack within weeks (my packages hardly ever get
>> any karma feedback despite their obvious use, though I must say that did
>> change for dnssec-conf after it blew up). So I objected, and got my way.
> As I said in my other mail, lack of feedback is not necessarily
> meaningless. If your update sits there for a week with no -1s, that
> gives us a decent idea it doesn't massively break anything: exactly as
> this proves. You may not get any +1s for dnssec-conf when it doesn't
> break anything, but - as you admit - you *do* get -1s when it breaks
> everything.
Glad you mention dnssec-conf.

1) It only received votes, because one of releases broke things badly 
and because Paul F. loudly asked the public to test.

2) Recent dnssec-conf updates all did receive several -1, nevertheless 
these updates were pushed.

3) dnssec-conf-1.21-8.fc12.noarch does not work for me, it's as broken 
as its predecessors for me.

=> This system doesn't work.

> So the system does, in fact, work, in so far as it gives us
> a usable indication of very bad breakages.
IMO, only on occasions the damage already has happened (dnssec-conf).

The vast majority of packages gets pushed without any votes.


More information about the devel mailing list