Updates Criteria Summary/Brainstorming

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at gmail.com
Tue Nov 23 17:40:49 UTC 2010

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 01:29:45PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Here's the latest list of ideas culled from this thread. 
> Note: these are NOT my ideas, I am just gathering them up so fesco can
> discuss them. 
> Feel free to add more concrete ideas, or let me know if I missed one
> you had posted. If folks could avoid "me too" or posts that contain no
> new information it would be easier for me to gather the actual
> ideas. ;) 
> I've split things into "General", "Security", "Critpath" and "non
> security/critpath" to help organize them. 
> Keep the ideas coming... 
Since people have been tossing around the general idea of testing being
needed for a few maintainer/package combos where bad updates traditionally
come from, here's a concrete proposal based on that:

> General: 
* Testing is only required for certain packages.  Those packages are the
  packages where problems have occurred before so fesco or other maintainers
  affected by the changes deem it necessary to supplement the maintainer's
  testing with outside help.

  - Option: supplement this list with critpath packages where the
    maintainers desire extra testing.  This means that we would no longer be
    dragging in dependencies immediately... only if updates by the
    dependency's maintaner to that package are breaking things.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20101123/d4cb6a8a/attachment.bin 

More information about the devel mailing list