What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

[David Malcolm]

On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 08:36 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 18:22 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > One way or another, if I were building a distribution that wanted to 
> > simultaneously claim that it is both new code and 'tested and working', 
> > I'd try to plan in a way that it wasn't a flip of the coin on every 
> > machine which you'll get today.
> 
> Now here's a crazy idea, that nobody seems to want to follow:
> 
> Treat rawhide as your 'new code' land, leave the release trees as your
> 'testing and working' code.  That is don't be so goddamn eager to push
> new packages and new upstream releases to every freaking branch in
> existence.
> 
> Of course, when I make suggestions like these, I become extremely
> unpopular.

I've only partly followed this discussion, but one simple implementation
idea, if this hasn't been thought of/implemented:
- have bodhi detect if the version part of the NVR is being changed; if
so, raise the karma level needed to push the package. 

Rationale: it's my belief that a rebase to a different upstream version
typically carries greater risk of destabilization than targeted
patching.  Thus, a bump to a more recent upstream should receive more
testing than a packaging/patch change.


Hope this helps
Dave