On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 08:36:41AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 02:23:33PM +0100, Till Maas wrote: > >On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 01:16:43PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > >> I would like to collect feedback on this issue. If you want to disable > >> direct stable pushes, why? Could there be a less radical solution to that > >> problem (e.g. a policy discouraging direct stable pushes for some specific > >> types of changes rather than a blanket ban)? On the other hand, if (like me) > >> you DON'T want that feature to go away, please provide valid use cases. > > > >Imho it takes too long to get packages into updates-testing, if people > >are really interested in testing packages, they often seem to get > >packages directly from Koji, e.g. on this update I got 3 positive Karma > >points (one of them was anonymous) within 76 minutes after submitting > >the update: > >https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2010-0604 > > > >It did not seem very useful to delay this update that also fixed several > >very annoying bugs any further. > > You've just illustrated the bodhi process working AS IT IS SUPPOSED TO. You > had testers giving karma, and they all had positive feedback, which means that > THE PACKAGE WAS TESTED BEFORE IT WENT TO STABLE. Imho it is more a perversion of how it is meant to be. This package was tested before it went to updates-testing and therefore went straight to stable. But the majority of packages goes to updates-testing and is not tested by someone else but the maintainer/does not get any karma, but still is pushed to stable after some time. Regards Till
Attachment:
pgpNP1tzG5h7A.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
