The new Update Acceptance Criteria are broken

Tom Lane tgl at redhat.com
Sat Nov 20 22:45:45 UTC 2010


Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> writes:
> I do. I don't believe all maintainers do. It's pretty hard to explain
> why updates that completely prevent the app in question from working, or
> even prevent the system from booting, got pushed in the past, if all
> maintainers actually test their updates.

I don't think it's so hard to explain as all that.  It could well be
that somebody tests a package, and it works *for him*, but breaks for
many other people.  An example of a very easy way for that to happen is
a missed dependency on a package that he happens to have installed.

I don't by any means disagree with the idea that testing packages before
they go out is a good thing.  What I have a problem with is the idea
that an "unfunded mandate" for that to happen is going to accomplish
much.  A policy isn't worth the electrons it's written on unless you can
bring resources to make it happen, and so far the resources have failed
to materialize.  Jawboning package maintainers is going to be an even
more spectacular failure, because they have much more than enough to do
already; and they're smart enough to know that turning them all into
individual ad-hoc test managers is an incredibly inefficient use of
their time.

			regards, tom lane


More information about the devel mailing list