On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 09:40:01AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > On 7/6/10 8:52 AM, Till Maas wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 11:34:25AM -0400, Will Woods wrote: > > > >> Once we're satisfied that depcheck does the right thing, we will > >> probably set it up to start adding automatic +1 karma from 'autoqa' when > >> updates pass the automated test suite (depcheck and possibly other tests > >> - rpmlint, rpmguard, etc.). We haven't yet decided if the autokarma will > >> apply to all packages or just critpath packages; it may apply > >> everywhere, which will make it a bit easier to get to +3 karma for > >> automated updates. > > > > IMHO it should not be a +1 karma but some different flag that is set for > > updates that passed the tests. > > > > Using karma is viewed as the path of least resistance to getting support > in current bodhi for this. For future bodhi yes, it makes some sense to > use some different flagging mechanism. Essentially using a different flag is just re-using the code used to flag a package as critpath-approved only with a different name. Therefore it should not need that much more effort. Btw. using the "path of least resistance" to implement policy changes seems to be what makes the new workflows suck for package maintainers, e.g. with the change in place using a auto-karma value of 1 will become 0. Regards Till
Attachment:
pgp3tkSsAT29t.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
