maxamillion at fedoraproject.org
Wed Jun 9 16:31:07 UTC 2010
Luke's dictionary is more correct than yours.
.... anyone else see how horrid the line I just wrote sounded in your head
when you read it? That's what this thread sounds like. Did we really need to
take some raw numbers that Luke was kind enough to put together and make it
into some sort of QA methods holy war?
-AdamM (From Android)
On Jun 9, 2010 2:11 AM, "Ralf Corsepius" <rc040203 at freenet.de> wrote:
On 06/09/2010 08:54 AM, Luke Macken wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 08:38 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Exactly. Your definition differs from Kevin's (and mine).
> ...which is exactly what I meant to being with.
To me, your definition of success is "compliance with *your* process".
Whether this process is suitable to improve package quality, whether the
technical system behind it is a good approach and whether your approach
actually improves package quality or is mere bureaucray is highly
That said, all you demonstrated is your system not being entirely
broken, but I don't see any "success" related to QA in your statistic.
devel mailing list
devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel