Drawing lessons from fatal SELinux bug #1054350

Kevin Fenzi kevin at scrye.com
Mon Jan 27 22:11:30 UTC 2014

On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:18:56 -0500
Matthew Miller <mattdm at fedoraproject.org> wrote:


> * possibly adding a "what should users test?" field to the update
> info.
>   I know that there's a "notes" field in the update, but maybe it'd
> help to explicitly include testing instructions?
>   Each package in the pkgdb (or in git, or wherever) could have
>   a standard list included in each update as the default (for
> example, for 'calc', it might be to try `calc -q
> read /usr/share/calc/regress.cal`. That would duplicate a likely
> smoke-test, though, so maybe also "run interactively and make sure
> basic math works".
>   Then, each update could also optionally (and this would be
> presented in bold if it were used) say something like "New release
> adds log() function; please test that it works", or "Severe bug where
> 1+1=3 corrected; please test that the answer now corresponds with
> consensus reality."

I could have sworn we already had something like this where bodhi would
add a link to a wiki page for test plan on a package if that wiki page
existed. I can't seem to find it now, so perhaps it was just something
we talked about, but never implemented. 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140127/a5a37200/attachment.sig>

More information about the devel mailing list