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

[Mike McCarty]

Eric Rostetter wrote:
> Quoting Mike McCarty <mike.mccarty at sbcglobal.net>:
> 
>> Then the Legacy Project has removed my ability not to subscribe
>> to "testing".
> 
> 
> No, the Legacy Project has _proposed_ to that, at least in your opinion.
> It was followed by something like "unless we get a lot of objection" so
> please, if you object, let it be known.

I did object, and then I saw that the decision was *made*.

>> Since Legacy is no longer in my yum configuration, it's no longer
>> an issue for me, good or bad.
> 
> 
> Yes, we lose a few people from the community every time this issue comes
> up.  I guess the hope is we will gain more if we release more, but I'm not
> sure it is true (hasn't been so far, as far as I can tell).

You didn't "lose" me because the issue came up, you "lost" me
because /a decision was made/.

>> I don't wish to subscribe to "testing".
>> Since "testing" and "release" have been merged, I have unsubscribed
>> from "release".
> 
> No, it was proposed that we merge them, but it is still under 
> consideration,
> and can still be blocked.  Your action is a bit premature.  But then,
> considering some of the responses you have received in e-mail (like having
> to pay to be notified) I don't blame you too much.

Mike
-- 
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!