[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: fedora stable branch updates Q&A policy



On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 21:53:04 +0100, Kyrre Ness Sjobak
<kyrre solution-forge net> wrote:
> What about informing people on this, having a system where developers
> from RH (core) and non-RH (extras) can ask for Q&A? A simpler system
> might also be a bettetr system IMO.

I've seen very little evidence that Red Hat packagers are interested
in a policy that enforces specific QA steps as policy for 'all'
updates.  And be aware that the issue of 'strict' QA policy gets
complicated by the existence of security updates.  To be fair.. i do
believe the kernel packagers have been populating updates-testing tree
in a timely manner to get as much community feedback as they can. 
There is an kernel in updates-testing right now in fact.

I do what I can to encourage Core package maintainers to use
updates-testing as much as possible, and my encouragement becomes
proportionally more aggressive when a notice a regression slip through
in an non-security update. My eye-poking stick has become quite blunt
and sticky slick with blood from the effort to 'encourage' packagers
to use -testing.

-jef"place my last sentence here"spaleta


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]