updates improvements/changes ideas

Michael Schwendt mschwendt at gmail.com
Mon Nov 29 18:04:49 UTC 2010

On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 12:40:25 -0500, James wrote:

> > * updates that only modify the spec could have a lower requirement.
> > (ie, to fix a packaging issue, no changes in the upstream software).  
> All %obsoletes, %requires, %provides, %files and %patch statements are
> only recorded in the .spec file.  Just because they are in the .spec
> file doesn't mean they are any less disruptive.  

True, but (1) it is considerably easier for a project like autoqa to catch
bad deps/conflicts/obsoletes than (2) to catch software bugs introduced in
a version upgrade. Plus (3) you don't want to do baby-sitting for
packagers who are expected to know what they're doing wrt packaging.

> > Non critpath/security: 
> > 
> > * reduce timeout for non critpath from 7 to 3 days. 
> > 
> > * change default autokarma to 2 or 1. 
> No immediate thoughts on these points.

Bodhi ought to make it impossible that the update submitter spends +1 on
her own update. It has been abused already.

And there ought to be an _enforced_ minimum number of days in
updates-testing for certain packages. They need time to be picked up by
the mirror-system. And testers need more time to become aware of new test
updates and then spend additional time on evalulating the updates.
It is completely useless if some testers _skip_ or shorten the
updates-testing period by giving +1 for koji builds or within 24 hours.
That is what has happened for a "mesa" update that hasn't seen sufficient
testing due to the short time it was offered as a test-update:

More information about the test mailing list