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

Re: Fedora QA ? - Re: What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora



On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 18:41 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 11.12.2008, 17:52 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius:
> > On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 17:08 +0100, Sven Lankes wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 11:58:51AM +0100, Matej Cepl wrote:
> > > 
> > > >> We should try to get the bohdi-karma-mechanism more popular. 
> > >  
> > > > IMNSHO we should get rid of it -- there is already one very good 
> > > > mechanism for registering bugs in the software and it is 
> > > > bugzilla.
> > > 
> > > Which can cater for negative feedback. I don't think most people would
> > > be too happy with bz-entries created just containing 'works for me'.
> > But this is exactly what is happening.
> > 
> > Cf. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475943
> > for a real world case.
> 
> Huh? This does not look like positive feedback to me but like a normal
> bug report.

Note the "works for me"s: It's the normal way users who report bugs
through bugzilla provide feedback on proposed fixes.


Note how the package maintainer pointed reporters to "fix-candidate"
packages: He directed users to packages in koji and not to packages in
*-testing.


Both observations are symptomatic for situations in which "non-trivial"
package bugs are being addressed. Neither *testing nor the karma stuff
are being applied. 

BTW: IMO this raises the next questions: Why don't successful koji
builds not automatically land in testing?

Ralf




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