AutoQA: distro congestion?

[Axel Thimm]

On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 10:54 +0200, Sven Lankes wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:44:03AM +0300, Axel Thimm wrote:
> 
> > This is probably part of the problem, I have been trying to push all 5
> > packages that are now in testing with bodhi rejecting due to autoqa.
> > Even packages that do have a positive autoqa tag on them like
> > fail2ban-0.8.4-27.fc13.
> 
> According to the Bodhi-Status-Site, you unpushed the update on
> 2011-04-17 21:24:29, then submitted it again a few seconds later.

Yes, this was after I had desperately tried to push it from testing to
stable and at the end tried to resubmit directly to stable. As said
previously security updates at least did get their requests noted.

> It has been pushed to testing on 2011-04-17 21:24:29 and it now needs to
> stay in testing for a week (or until it has reached sufficient karma
> including proventester feedback) until it can be pushed to stable.

Oh well, it had been in testing for almost a week and I even felt bad
about not stable-pushing it earlier as it was a security update.

> This is what bodhi refers to with "Bodhi is now enforcing the Package
> Update Acceptance Criteria across all Fedora releases." - that text also
> links to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_acceptance_criteria

This mentions that critical packages and security updates need at least
2 karma points and a proventester, that's even more than setting karma
on threshold 1 (???). Is that really the current policy for _security
updates_?
-- 
http://thimm.gr/ - http://ATrpms.net/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20110420/53fac008/attachment.bin