Jesse Keating wrote:
> In many cases these do apply. I participate in cases such as this
> nearly every day, and it's working. We're testing fixes, rejecting bad
> ones, and getting the right builds into stable. The system is working,
> but as we all know, no system is perfect. However perfect is the enemy
> of good. We can't take the position of "karma isn't the perfect
> solution to every update, therefor we should do away with testing all
> together".
You're attacking a strawman!!!
I never said "we should do away with testing all together"! Please, all of
you, STOP putting these words into my mouth! (You're not the first one to do
it, just look elsewhere in this thread, and in earlier threads, for
evidence.)
I am saying that SOME updates can be pushed with less or even no testing.
This does NOT mean that testing should not be used in most cases. It just
means that it should be the maintainer's discretion whether to use it or
not. The maintainer knows best how to handle his/her package. A dumb tool
automatically enforcing some generic rules which are the same for all
packages does not. And distinguishing 2 classes of packages (critical and
non-critical) out of our thousands of packages doesn't change this in the
least.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
