On Fri, 2010-03-19 at 13:34 -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Thomas Spura > <spurath@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Why testing? > > > > A "maybe-broken update" is better than a "non-working programm" isn't > > it? > > Because there are a significant number of people that will scream > bloody murder if people push packages directly to stable without > having the package spend at least a little time in testing, no matter > what the reason. There have been enough problems with seemingly > "safe" updates that go directly to stable that I have a hard time > disagreeing with them. Besides, the principle is not in fact correct. Just for instance, an installable package which causes massive data corruption is not better than an uninstallable package... Not saying that's the case here, just pointing out that 'it's uninstallable' is not the worst possible flaw a package can have. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
