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

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 03/01/2010 05:52 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
> On 02/26/2010 08:55 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Michael Schwendt wrote:
>>> That would be a ridiculous decision. It would be much better to disable
>>> that feature only for those update submitters who really have been
>>> dilettantish enough to use it inappropriately more than once.
>>
>> Yeah, that's a good idea. We really need to avoid punishing everyone for the
>> few incompetent maintainers who screw up!
...
> The goal of the discussion in FESCo is to make sure there's an adequate safety
> net, so that when maintainers make simple mistakes, they should have to deal
> with them - not with exponentially large consequences and 4am phone calls.
>
> Right now, the only proposal for doing so is to restrict what can be released
> without spending some time in testing.
The issues that at least I have been trying to point out:

* Is "testing" an adequate safety net?
* Is "karma" an adequate means to "assure quality"
* Is banning a direct pushes an adequate means to improve quality ?

My answer to all: Neither of them are.

The solution to actually improve quality are along the lines of
* maintainers to acting more carefully and think twice about what they 
are pushing.

* rel-eng to implement automated procedures to catch at least the worst 
mistakes (e.g. dep breakages, SONAME-breakages).

Ralf