Updates: karma and timeouts

[Darryl L. Pierce]

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 08:37:19AM +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:09:05 +0200, Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
> > I think if those packages are languishing, it's like
> > the packager was already notified and chose not to push.
> 
> Package goes into testing with the goal to get into stable.  Therefore by
> default it should go into stable when it gets approved for it.

But tacit approval is not the same as having been tested by third
parties and verified as working.
 
> There must be a specific reason one puts package into testing and later not
> wanting to push it to stable.  If such reason appears one revokes the package
> anyway.

And that reason mam be "I want three people to test it and give it
karma" and it's not happened yet. No reason to revoke the package, it
just has been tested by enough people in the packager's opinion.

-- 
Darryl L. Pierce <mcpierce at gmail.com>
http://mcpierce.multiply.com/
"What do you care what people think, Mr. Feynman?"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/attachments/20120713/3464eddc/attachment.sig>