On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 13:31 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 22:09 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > (2) Update to a new package that I know not many people are using. > > This (2) is something we should try and figure out, IMHO. Trying to > apply the same rules and guidelines to 8k+ packages doesn't work. A rough metric of risk = package size * 10 * is in default install * number of packages that depend on it * their size would probably be good enough in most cases to get a feel for how much misery a bad update might trigger and force over a thresh-hold into testing before stable C. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
