What do rawhide testers want and expect?
jspaleta at gmail.com
Mon Sep 12 17:05:40 UTC 2011
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com>wrote:
> In some cases, expectations may be off which means we need to market
> our deliverables better. In other cases, they may be looking for a
> better way to get attention to rawhide issues when everyone else is
> focused on F-XX-beta. In that case we can look at a mechanism that
> allows for less "zero-sum" game antics of elementary school yard "you
> suck, no you suck more" that the threads head towards.
I'll ask a related question. What can we do to help maintainers more
effectively catch hold of brown bag issues for their untested packages?
I've read the discussion from Richard Jones which regard to how
virtualization plays a role for libguestfs dev and how they are using using
%check section and catching problems. I think there is a lot there to mull
I've also used Kevin's rawhide instance to do pre-rawhide submission package
testing on occasion when I had reason to believe my (admittedly non-critical
path) packages might be be a bit wonky across an upstream release bump or
So with all that in mind, does Fedora as a project have the
ability/resources to make the use of throw-away virtual instance for
pre-submission testing available as part of best practice rawhide workflow?
Would wide spread use of virtualized rawhide help bridge a gap?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel