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

[Mike McCarty]

Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Marc Deslauriers wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 14:44 -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> Since Legacy is no longer in my yum configuration, it's no longer
>>> an issue for me, good or bad. I don't wish to subscribe to "testing".
>>> Since "testing" and "release" have been merged, I have unsubscribed
>>> from "release". If the security notices on FC2 get severe enough,
>>> I'll just move on to CentOs, Scientific Linux, or Debian. Since
>>> I'm already helping administer a Debian box, it might make sense
>>> to move to that.
>>>   
>>
>>
>> Just out of curiosity, what are the Debian, CentOS and Scientific Linux
>> QA procedures? Maybe Fedora Legacy could use some of them to get FL
>> releases up to their standards. They do have documented QA procedures,
>> right?
>>  
>>
> You think?. I am not so sure they are well documented at all and Debian 
> says on http://qa.debian.org/ "We know that, at the moment, there is no 
> real quality assurance for Debian, in a conventional meaning of that 
> term". Feel free to look for better QA processes than Fedora legacy 
> within the community distributions and suggest ideas.
> 

Yes, my indictment earlier was for *all* distributions of Linux.
But Legacy has gone further than I can follow along, that's all.

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!