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. Stable pushes are useful for new packages, particularly "non-core" new packages. Also many, many packages get precisely no comments in Bodhi, even allowing for two weeks of so-called testing. In general, FESCo should trust packagers to do the right thing, and encourage people to test the packages in updates-testing and provide feedback to Bodhi. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com Fedora now supports 80 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#) http://cocan.org/getting_started_with_ocaml_on_red_hat_and_fedora -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
