Refining the update queues/process [Was: Worthless updates]

[Till Maas]

On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:39:02PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 23:47 +0100, Till Maas wrote:

> > to how these numbers have changed in a week. I hope then everyone from
> > the QA SIG is using the script to report feedback, so it will be save to
> > say that an update was not tested at all if it did not receive any
> > feedback.
> 
> Well, I'm using your script, but still intentionally skipping certain
> updates. I don't think it's a good idea to give a +1 on an update that I
> haven't really directly tested just because it didn't blow up my system,
> though if it *did* blow up my system I'd certainly give it a -1. We
> could institute a 'I booted with this installed and nothing exploded'
> button, but I'm not sure that would ultimately be valuable...?

Currently you could use 0-karma with a comment to explain that you only
installed it. But I would like to have this button, just to make it at
least possible to find updates where nobody pushed this button.

Regards
Till
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100306/acb038eb/attachment.bin