On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 00:52 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi, > > Since it is the fav season for proposals apparently, let me throw in my > Fedora/hat in the ring too. This only applies to updates to general > releases. > > For critical path packages > (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Critical_Path_Packages) : > > * Must go through updates-testing repository > * Only major bug fixes and security fixes. > * Must go through updates testing repository even for security fixes > Rationale: Expedited security fixes have caused some serious regressions > in the past (D-Bus, Bind, Thunderbird updates etc). > * Requires QA team to sign off on these updates and I will leave them > to define the criteria for it. I believe the criteria should be based > on feedback from testers rather than the number of days. > * Exceptions or expedited update requests must go via release engineering > > Non-critical path packages > > * Don't blindly push every upstream release as update > * Preserve stability and avoid unexpected changes and push updates with > enhancements only if the benefit is considered worth the risk of > potential regressions > > Recommendations: > > * Run AutoQA on all updates Just a heads up. AutoQA describes the framework. We'll need to be more specific about what tests we'd want AutoQA to execute against the updates. > * Hookup PackageKit to updates-testing repo and allow users to opt-in > and provide feedback easily > * Evaluate extending the criteria based on how well we succeed with a > more conservative update policy for critical path packages > > Let me know what you think > > Rahul > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
