Re: Fedora and PDC, road forward

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

 



On 06/13/2018 03:03 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> ok. Note that this data changes over time, and releng needs a script to
> update it (or better a automatic updating of it).

Yeah there is a Bodhi ticket about this and I noted that we will need to
make sure we still work with releng's script if we make the change:

https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2433

> We might want to bring up the bigger topic of if we want to bother
> keeping this. The only current use of it is some rules about going
> stable in bodhi... are those actually useful?

This sounds like a policy decision, so perhaps the question could be
posed to FESCo or possibly the packaging committee. It does make some
intuitive sense to me that we would treat certain packages more
stringently than we do others, but I don't have data to say one way or
the other whether the current policies are beneficial. I will say that I
would feel uncomfortable changing the policy without the blessing of a
governing body.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/UV5EB5BGLQE7KMAFPQ7AOBDAHAZNVBLE/

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Development]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux