On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 14:28 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > A_copy_ to users' list would suffice. Test updates are relevant to the > > users - and the build reports are sort of an early warning system about > > what updates will likely be unleashed. It's especially relevant to the > > users, when the updates aren't tested prior to entering the stable > > updates repository. And so far, there is no QA team that tests them. > > Once they have entered the updates repo, regular users are supposed to > > install them, and then it's too late. > > A copy of broken deps should be obsolete when Adam and friends are > allowed to use AutoQA to prevent this sort of thing from hitting stable. > Should you even worry about it? It's not a question of 'allowed', it's a question of when it's actually done. =) If you follow the regular AutoQA updates in the QA meetings, you'll see that the depcheck test is one of the more complex to implement and requires integration with releng. We also still have a few hurdles to putting the AutoQA framework in general into full production - mainly getting gwt properly packaged in a way that's acceptable for the Fedora repos. The timescale on AutoQA's depcheck testing going active is still probably multiple weeks and probably a few months. That's something of a WAG - wwoods would be able to give a much more reliable prediction - but I think it's in the ballpark. So I don't think we're yet far enough along that we can just say 'meh, autoqa will fix it, let's not bother doing anything else about it'. -- 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
