On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 18:39 -0800, Benjamin Smith wrote: > > Either way, automating this reporting process would: > 1) Make it easier to do testing, and > 2) Provide more extensive testing of a kernel than Mozilla. > > Jesse, what do you think of this idea? This makes it even more complicated. points? how many are enough? What makes one package more critical than another? How ambiguous could this be? The issue here is that we need to lower the bar for folks to test on other platforms than what they are using. Continue to get quality human testing on more packages on more releases. If we can't get a human to look at a package, then we shouldn't be releasing it. If we can't get enough humans looking at enough packages for a given release, we need to drop the release. We dropped 7.2 and 8.0 for these reasons. FC1 is next on my chopping block for when we pick up FC4 (and chopping FC2 at the same time). -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
