On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 01:30:10PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 19:32 +0200, Denis Leroy wrote: > > > > My biggest question about the whole QA stuff is: while some packages are > > nice desktop applications with menu entries, many (most?) new packages > > are going to be somewhat obscure libraries, plugins, perl/py modules, > > i.e. things that are difficult to test. For example, if i push a new > > version of libgnomeuimm26 to updates-testing, will the QA folks know > > that the only way to test that is to actually test gcdmaster, workrave, > > referencer and wp_tray ? > > > Obviously not. Which is why the corresponding internal tools used for > RHEL errata have a field where the engineer is supposed to fill in QA > test instructions. Bodhi doesn't have that (yet ?) That's a good idea, I'll throw a task into bodhi's trac for it. I have zero experience with the RHEL errata tool, so I don't really know what it offers; are there any other features that it has that you'd like to see in bodhi? luke -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
