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

Jon Masters jonathan at jonmasters.org
Mon Mar 1 07:34:44 UTC 2010


On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 21:30 -0800, John Poelstra wrote:
> Kevin Kofler said the following on 02/28/2010 03:41 PM Pacific Time:
> > Till Maas wrote:
> >> My proposal: If it passes all AutoQA tests and matches the criteria by
> >> Kevin Koffler[0], then the update is ok, except that critical path
> >> packages should be inspected more carefully.
> >>
> >> [0]
> >> [http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-February/131570.html
> >
> > I think I've written more complete writeups in earlier mailing list posts,
> > it may make sense to dig them up.
> >
> 
> It would make more sense to end the madness that is this mail thread and 
> start a wiki page that clearly outlines your position. You lost me about 
> 200 posts ago.

+1

One thing I would suggest being considered in an alternative proposal is
a compromise policy for specific stacks or non-critical path packages.
For example, if the standard policy affecting me as a GNOME user is that
major changes will be confined to new releases (my very strong personal
preference) then I don't personally much care if it is official policy
that KDE is allowed an exception to rebase on some other schedule.

Jon.




More information about the devel mailing list