changes are needed, we need keep moving

[Eric Rostetter]

Quoting Pekka Savola <pekkas at netcore.fi>:

> On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Eric Rostetter wrote:
> > If you mean that it only takes 1 verify vote for any version of an update
> > to publish an update (across all versions) than I stand by what I said.
> > Otherwise, I'd have to ask that you clarify what you mean.
> 
> Yes, this is what I said.  It currently requires 1 verify vote to
> VERIFY one version (in the past, the rules said two for each, but
> packages never got out that way so it has been taken down to 1).

That is very bad.  We really need to restore it to 2 votes.  One vote
isn't enough.  Seriously.

If we're not able to get 2 votes, then plea to the list for the second.
If we still don't get 2 votes then we need to disband this project, or
change it into a different project.

Seriously, if we can't get 2 votes for a package, then there is a real
problem going on.

> What I say is that if folks don't care enough to report their
> successes or problems within two weeks of someone formally first test
> of the package, they deserve what they get.

That isn't the point of the project though.  It would be much better to
get two votes.  Heck, if you do one, and I do one, we're done.  The only
time that would be a problem is the once or twice a year we go on vacation.

> That said, I could also live with two verify votes (for any version)
> plus the similar timeout, but I think timeliness is more important.

I can agree to 2 votes plus timeout.  If we give 2 weeks for the votes,
and 2 additional weeks for the timeout, then everything is done in one
month.  Sounds reasonable to me.

> FYI, one verify vote is sufficient to VERIFY a distro version right
> now, so this is why I said one measly verify vote.

I wasn't aware of this; last I knew we still needed two votes.  How/when
did this change?

> We can't avoid these errors completely by testing, because there just
> aren't enough people willing to do the testing and report the errors.
> We'll just have to publish and revise if something breaks.

But we can try better/harder to get more votes (including say, getting me
to test/vote more, and getting those who run updates-testing but don't
vote to vote).
 
Worst of all is things like the recent post of "I reported a problem with
package X to person Y but never heard back about it."

> > If you want commercial support, buy it from Red Hat or Progeny or someone.
> > Otherwise, if you want "free" support you have to "work" for it.
> 
> Personally, I think this is a good principle.  You may also get free
> support without any work, but you surely don't get the right to
> complain about it unless you contribute.

But this list is a complaint heaven right now.  We need to address this
as a real problem, and try to get a real solution.  Stopping the testing
isn't a real solution.

> --
> Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
> 
> --
> fedora-legacy-list mailing list
> fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
> 


-- 
Eric Rostetter