BEWARE: a problematic glibc made it to stable (F16)

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2011-10-24 at 18:50 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > We have lots of suggestions. As I've said at least fifty times, it's
> > pointless going too far with the slapping of band-aids on the current
> > karma system, because it's fundamentally too simplistic: it's never
> > going to be perfect and there is a definite point of diminishing returns
> > if we keep screwing with it.
> 
> Right. That's why we need to abolish it.

Why? How would that make anything better? With the proven tester system,
one somewhat-broken update got through. Without it, we would have had
five or six utterly broken glibc updates this F16 cycle. Just check the
history of submissions to glibc in Bodhi. Given the known attitudes of
the glibc maintainers, if they were allowed to simply submit all their
builds directly to stable, they would certainly have done so...and
broken everyone's systems time and time again.

I'd say the history of F16 updates to glibc demonstrates the raging
success of the proventesters system, not its failure.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net