On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 18:41 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 11.12.2008, 17:52 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > > On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 17:08 +0100, Sven Lankes wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 11:58:51AM +0100, Matej Cepl wrote: > > > > > > >> We should try to get the bohdi-karma-mechanism more popular. > > > > > > > IMNSHO we should get rid of it -- there is already one very good > > > > mechanism for registering bugs in the software and it is > > > > bugzilla. > > > > > > Which can cater for negative feedback. I don't think most people would > > > be too happy with bz-entries created just containing 'works for me'. > > But this is exactly what is happening. > > > > Cf. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475943 > > for a real world case. > > Huh? This does not look like positive feedback to me but like a normal > bug report. Note the "works for me"s: It's the normal way users who report bugs through bugzilla provide feedback on proposed fixes. Note how the package maintainer pointed reporters to "fix-candidate" packages: He directed users to packages in koji and not to packages in *-testing. Both observations are symptomatic for situations in which "non-trivial" package bugs are being addressed. Neither *testing nor the karma stuff are being applied. BTW: IMO this raises the next questions: Why don't successful koji builds not automatically land in testing? Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
