Re: no mandatory QA testing at all [Re: crazy thought about how to ease QA testing]

[Eric Rostetter <rostetter mail utexas edu>]

Quoting Jesse Keating <jkeating j2solutions net>:

> On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 02:20 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Seems to be a misunderstanding here. There are separate repositories
> > for
> > testing and general legacy updates. Yes?
>
> He is speaking in virtual terms.  Since we would introduce a timeout, he
> is afraid that the quality of packages coming into released will be
> lower than it is right now, and be considered "testing" packages.
>
> IMHO the quality of packages hitting updates-testing is pretty on par
> with the quality of packages hitting Fedora updates.  So I'm not so sure
> what the problem is here.

The problem is two fold:

1) You can't use Fedora standards for the RHL releases, only for the  
Fedora releases.
2) This is a major change to the tenents that FL was founded on.  Any such
change must be by consensus.  We must establish if there is a consensus or
not.

--
Eric Rostetter
The Department of Physics
The University of Texas at Austin

Go Longhorns!