On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 16:10 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Matt McCutchen <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The comparison to bugs is not valid. A bug is the same bug until it is > > fixed. An update consisting of different packages is a different > > update. > > What? We don't tag testing-updates with an ID. There's another possible explanation for that policy: users who don't participate in testing know that any update with an ID went to stable and won't be distracted by references to IDs of testing updates in various forums. But actually, I would prefer giving every update an ID. > Testing packages...are > implicitly in flux...there's no intention to provide an audit trail > via a mechanism like our ID nomenclature that tags a collection of > packages as an identifiable update when the packages are in testing. > I think your overly narrowing the flexibility inherent in the testing > process with your attempt to define a testing updating they way you > just did. Why is this "flexibility" a good thing? All it does is confuse testers like me. -- Matt -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
