On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 05:01 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 05/03/2010 11:12 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 18:51 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> > >> Except karma requirements (which were in force due to the critical path > >> process) did NOT prevent this particular regression, nor would a "1 week > >> minimum in testing" requirement have prevented it (the update spent 8 days > >> in testing). That process DOES NOT WORK. It just adds extra bureaucracy and > >> delays the fix for the regression. (But thankfully, direct stable pushes are > >> still possible for KDE packages, which allowed us to do one to fix this > >> regression quickly.) > >> > > > > You are definitely missing the forest for the trees here. > So do you: The karma stuff will never work and if then only in corner-cases. > > In probably the overwhelming majority of cases, all karma does is adding > to Fedora's bureaucracy, without being actually functional. > > > In the > > proposals I've seen, the was no mandate that an update spend a week in > > testing, provided it got enough karma before that. If the issue at hand > > is so egregious to need a push ASAP, then there should be plenty of > > people on hand to snag the update from koji and provide you the > > necessary karma nearly immediately. > > You are presuming a bug > * affects many people > * is reproducable by many people > * has "user visible" impacts > * users are volunteering to provide feedback > So it its none of these why do you want to fast track it into stable? Leave it updates-testing for 2-3 weeks and pull it in then if nobody complains. If you can't find anyone the bug affects I don't see why its an urgent must-fix. Dave. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
