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

Re: repo layout for EPEL (Re: Initial Proposal for doing Enterprise Extras)



On Sun, 2006-09-24 at 17:36 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

> Opinions?

The idea of a "testing" repo doesn't work. Very few users want to be a
guinea pig, even fewer enterprise users have time to be a guinea pig. It
will get virtually no use, and when you move it from "testing" to
official, and it still is broken, you're going to have mislead users
into thinking that some sort of formalized QA process occurred.

User> Hey, why didn't this work right? It went through "testing"?

This is pretty much why we dropped "testing" repos from Fedora.

When we have a team of dedicated QA engineers who can test every single
EPEL package through a matrix of tests and usecases, then and only then
should we consider "testing" repos. If this is not in place, we should
be honest and upfront about the quality of EPEL bits as "best effort",
and not delay them unnecessarily.

~spot
-- 
Tom "spot" Callaway || Red Hat || Fedora || Aurora || GPG ID: 93054260

"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always
that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence
and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We
will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in
our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended
from fearful men -- not from men who feared to write, to speak, to
associate and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular."
-- Edward R. Murrow, March 9, 1954


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