On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Luke Macken wrote: >> This report definitely conveys the shortcomings in our testing, however, >> it does show us improving with each release. For Fedora 13, we implemented >> the No Frozen Rawhide process with improved Critical Path policies, which >> were definitely a success. With these enhanced procedures, along with the >> upcoming implementation of AutoQA and the new Package update acceptance >> criteria >> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_acceptance_criteria), I >> think we'll see these numbers drastically improve in the future. > > Only because those numbers are taylored towards that very process (they > measure the exact same things that process is going to enforce) and do not > reflect the actual quality of the packages in any way. > > You can make really anything a "success" by measuring the very symptoms of > the process and calling them a metric of "quality". > > The reasons for which Bodhi karma (especially in its current incarnation) is > a completely broken indicator of quality have been pointed out in several > past threads. > > Kevin Kofler > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > I'll have to agree with Kevin. I can't how any of those numbers represent the quality of anything. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
