Proposed udpates policy change

H. Guémar karlthered at
Tue Mar 9 11:00:42 UTC 2010

Sounds pretty sensible.
We should also keep in mind that one size does not fit all. While core
and widely used packages should have a more conservative update path,
some packages could benefit from faster release. karma mechanism +
feedback integration in PK looks like a total win for the latter.

Promoting the use of fedora-easy-karma among contributors (kudos to
Till Maas !) would be more effective than a half baked proposition
(hasty decisions are often bad ones).

2010/3/9 Rahul Sundaram <metherid at>:
> I don't see how we expect that for all packages to get enough karma and
> while some of them can get feedback within the current infrastructure
> and considering the wide variety of packages (niche libraries for
> example)  it is naive to believe that we are going to accomplish and
> hence my counter points are:
> *  We need improvements in our infrastructure (easy karma is one avenue
> but Pacagekit integration and other ways to get users to provide input
> needs to be in place first)
> *  We need to consider what we need as exceptions to this rule or more
> sensibly enforce this rule only in crit path packages initially
> *  If a time limit is considered as a alternative we need to document
> ways to escalate and file a exception if necessary and again I would
> recommend only consider enforcing it for crit packages first
> As it current stands I am against this proposal
> Rahul

More information about the devel mailing list