Kevin Kofler wrote: > 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. Fedora security updates are regularly given no testing and are pushed directly to stable. Perhaps you should classify your updates with a severity of security. Why should you abuse the system? Because the system is abusing you. While I (and Kevin!) agree that testing is useful, as I became more involved after the dbus debacle, the freedom of packagers to handle their packages freely should be maintained. The recent upswing in policies and requirements is clouding Fedora's vision. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
