submitters +1ing their own packages
caillon at redhat.com
Thu Sep 8 14:17:35 UTC 2011
On 09/07/2011 05:47 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> As someone on the other side of this (although not strongly, I could
> be convinced), I don't think thats my concern at all...
> * As a maintainer you should only be pushing an update you feel
> works/fixes something anyhow. Shouldn't that be an implied +1 always
> from the maintainer?
Except that some maintainers build packages and submit them without
testing them at all.
I submit that we should be encouraging maintainers to test their builds,
not discouraging it (which turning off selfkarma would do).
If the current rule is based on the fact that we would like 3 people to
test besides the maintainer, we could just bump the autokarma thresshold
from 3 to 4, and additionally encourage the maintainer to test.
> * As a maintainer it's easy to have a env that gets out of sync with
> what a QA or end user would use. Ie, you make 20 iterations of a
> package to test something, tweak configs to check something, and get
> it all working, but perhaps your machine is no longer setup the way a
> fresh install or upgrade of your package would be. Or you tested a
> version and then changed just 'one little thing' and pushed that and
> it turned out to break it.
It's also fairly easy, if not easier, as a tester to get out of sync
with what an end user would use since you're likely to be installing
broken stuff on your system which could have residual effects.
> * Even the best of us would like another pair of eyes to confirm
> something is really fixed/working.
Yes, but we also should encourage the maintainer to confirm this too.
Many past bugs could have been avoided had the maintainer tested and
noticed that the fix didn't quite work the way it should have.
More information about the devel