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

Adam Williamson awilliam at redhat.com
Sat Feb 27 06:23:05 UTC 2010

On Sat, 2010-02-27 at 06:03 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:

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

This is indeed a problem. Obviously, relying on the judgment of
maintainers isn't working.

...which is why there's a proposal not to rely entirely on the judgment
of maintainers any more. Which is why there's a proposal not to do so
any more.

Look how everything fits together!

> 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.

See above.

> > 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).

I disagree. I already cited one example in this thread of a broken
update being caught before it went to stable. I can cite several others,
if you require.

> The vast majority of packages gets pushed without any votes.

Again, no votes does not mean no information.
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org

More information about the devel mailing list