shortening time passed in bodhi?

[Jesse Keating]

On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 16:04 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> What are the reasons for holding updates? Is there somebody actually
> verifying that the package works, doesn't break the distro or the like?
> What exactly do releng/QA people with updates, ie what checks?

At this point we haven't inserted any automated QA into the system.  I
have some plans, but they will mostly be post-build, rather than
post-bodhi request, although we could do it both times.

The main reason we haven't inserted any automated QA is that to get a
correct picture of what the distro would look like with that update
added takes a full compose, to ensure we get the right view of multilib,
and that we don't have an older copy of the package update floating in
repos resolving deps it shouldn't, etc...  The compose process itself is
extremely time and resource consuming and it unfortunately hasn't been
as high of a priority to tackle as it should have been.

I feel pretty confident that we've solved many of our other major
problems and can now focus attention on better QA through automation and
that will be one of my main focuses during the F11/F12 cycles.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20081126/1add223b/attachment.sig>