Proposed udpates policy change
ian at ianweller.org
Tue Mar 9 00:19:59 UTC 2010
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 09:59:29PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> We assume the following axioms:
> 1) Updates to stable that result in any reduction of functionality to
> the user are unacceptable.
> 2) It is impossible to ensure that functionality will not be reduced
> without sufficient testing.
> 3) Sufficient testing of software inherently requires manual
> intervention by more than one individual.
I agree with these.
> The ability for maintainers to flag an update directly into the updates
> repository will be disabled. Before being added to updates, the package
> must receive a net karma of +3 in Bodhi.
I have some difficulty agreeing that +3 is "sufficient testing" for all
packages. I know a *lot* of people who used Gwibber when I maintained
it. It's probably the most used package I have ever maintained, and I
couldn't get anybody to test it without lobbying people in #fedora-docs
and on the Planet. +3 is too much for packages like these.
It's not the job of a package maintainer to campaign and say "hey, pay
attention to my package that only provides one Python function for a few
people who need it," let alone a nicely-done end-user application that a
lot of people use.
Maybe +3 karma is OK if we allow for a push straight to updates after
the old_testing period comes along. (Oh look, another new one of those
in my INBOX now.)
> At present, this policy will not apply to updates that are flagged as
> security updates.
Why? Don't those need testing too?
Ian Weller <ian at ianweller.org>
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100308/609ab78c/attachment.bin
More information about the devel