Release criteria proposal: conflicts / dependencies

[Paul W. Frields]

On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 01:10:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 15:58 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> 
> > > I like to see that always be a requirement for the stable, stable+updates
> > > and rawhide (assuming the rawhide-pending tag becomes a reality).
> > 
> > I would like to see this eventually too.  However, we don't have a
> > capability to stop it from happening, other than our current method of
> > relying on people to do the right thing.  That could effectively mean
> > that anyone could inadvertently hold up shipping a release at "the
> > edge of space" through a bad push.
> 
> This isn't actually the case, as no-one can push directly to any of
> those places, certainly just prior to release. (Well, except security
> updates.) Everything goes to updates-testing first; we can catch broken
> deps there and refuse to push them into stable.

I was going to argue that we've had this problem occur in the case of
security updates with e.g. web browser stack, but on the other hand
that would be in the critical path anyway.

I may be out of touch here, for which I apologize in advance.  What
mechanism currently prevents broken deps in updates-testing from being
pushed into stable?

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
          Where open source multiplies: http://opensource.com