QA's Package update policy proposal

[Kevin Kofler]

Al Dunsmuir wrote:
> The  update to an older stable release should be made widely available
> in   that   release's   updates-testing   after  the  equivalent  (not
> necessarily identical) fix has been widely tested in the latest stable
> release.

Uh, no, just no.

They should go to updates-testing for both releases at the same time. 
Anything else:
1. makes things harder for the maintainer, as he/she has to go through all 
the Bodhi procedures twice,
2. just delays the fix for users for no good reason.

I can somewhat understand the argument that they should get separate testing 
(even though I disagree with it), or even that the stable pushes should be 
staged (even though I also disagree with that), but I really don't see what 
it hurts to have the update available in updates-testing right away. Testing 
is what updates-testing is for.

> This minimizes the risk that due to a different execution environment,
> build  environment, configuration or whatever the seemingly equivalent
> fix  does  not work but causes a regression. You may start at the same
> place  in  the  older stable release, but may end up down and entirely
> different rabbit hole.

Is this really such a common issue that it makes it worth delaying all 
updates, including bugfixes, while waiting for testing that may never arrive 
(because those folks who like testing things tend to run the current stuff)?

        Kevin Kofler