Mark Wielaard <mjw@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Jesse Keating <jkeating <at> redhat.com> writes: >> This is my issue too. There is claim that it was tested, yet it wasn't >> tested in the same place we require every other feature to be tested, >> that being rawhide. > Although it obviously would have been far nicer to have had this all in before > the mass rebuild, there were multiple test builds against rawhide > packages. ISTM the major argument in favor of letting this in now, namely better debuginfo data, is essentially moot because it missed the mass rebuild. The majority of packages are going to go out with old debuginfo. Is there any chance of doing a new mass rebuild now? That would actually provide the intended benefit. Plus, if we see any significant number of failures, it would be sufficient evidence that the update ought to be backed out; whereas if we don't, then it would assuage peoples' entirely legitimate fears. (I entirely agree with the concerns about this being a violation of agreed-on process, btw, and would not be unhappy with a summary rejection as an alternative.) regards, tom lane -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
