Updates Criteria Summary/Brainstorming

Till Maas opensource at till.name
Tue Nov 23 18:19:56 UTC 2010

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 07:06:33PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Till Maas wrote:
> > Afaik there is no need for a maintainer to set different acceptance
> > thresholds for his updates. At least nobody ever explained to me why
> > this would be helpful.
> * Upgrade paths! I DON'T want my foo-1.2.3-4.fc13 update to go out before my 
> foo-1.2.3-4.fc14 update, even if it happens to get karma first.
> * Possibility to look at the feedback. E.g. if an update has "-1, deletes 
> all my e-mail", "+1, can haz noo verzion?" and "+1, didn't test e-mail, 
> everything else works", I'm NOT going to push the update!
> * Because people just make better decisions than software, period.
> In fact, IMHO automatic pushing is completely stupid, and the current 
> process which heavily relies on it is just broken.

I did not write about the automatic pushing threshold but only about the
acceptance threshold.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20101123/cefa52d0/attachment.bin 

More information about the devel mailing list