The new Update Acceptance Criteria are broken

Adam Williamson awilliam at
Sat Nov 13 04:43:17 UTC 2010

On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 23:14 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:

> 2. I screwed up and introduced a packaging bug, for instance bad
> dependencies or inability to "yum update".  That's been known to happen
> too.  But I have a lot more faith in autoqa being able to catch that
> kind of problem in a timely fashion than I do in manual testing catching
> it.

In the long run so do we, but right now, autoqa is not hooked up to the
build process in any way. It's manual testing or nothing.

> I guess what this boils down to is that I'd be happier with the testing
> process if it were actually successful at finding problems.  In my
> experience, it's a week's delay for exactly zero return.

It does find problems. Though, by what you say, not in your packages, so
I know where you're coming from; but we've certainly caught a positive
integer amount of bugs with the process. :)
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org

More information about the devel mailing list