On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 09:35 +0200, Marcela Mašláňová wrote: > that I've already fixed. Users want fixes immediately, they are not > interested in some processes. Many users don't even have FAS account and Users also want regressions not to happen (see how much belly-aching there is over the nss multilib issue, or any of the famous historical regressions - udev etc). These two things are not mutually compatible. > [1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-LDAP-0.40-1.fc13 > [2] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-version-0.82-1.fc13 perl-version is in the critpath, but perl-LDAP is not; there would be no enforcement of update karma for perl-LDAP. There is no enforced waiting period for updates at present, the only criterion that's ever been enforced is that, during the pre-release phase, F13 updates required +1 from someone in rel-eng or qa and another +1 from anyone to be pushed. This has not been the case since F13's release, as we're working on the permanent process; in the meantime, it works as it always has historically (you can push anything you want at any time). Are you sure your updates didn't just get held up in the pre-release freeze? There's nothing new about that, we've been freezing immediately prior to release for years. But looking at the dates, I'm fairly sure that at the time you did the perl-LDAP update, you could have pushed it to stable without any problems, if you'd tried. Your perl-version update got the required threshold of feedback exactly one week after it was pushed to testing (submitted 2010-05-11, pushed 2010-05-12, second +1 received 2010-05-19); you could have submitted it to stable any time after that second +1 was received. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
