On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 09:33:46AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 14:34 +0000, Petr Pisar wrote: > > > I do not get the idea why I should filter some irrelevant mails if > > better is to not sent them. Especially if I cannot solve the subject of > > the mail. Yeah, the subject is somobody does not did his job. I cannot > > imagine the knowledge would help me in my packager duties. > > Your packager duties include aiding in ensuring testing of your packages > takes place. Note that this is not explicit. What is explicit is that maintainers are expected to: "Deal with reported bugs in a timely manner " http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_maintainer_responsibilities I think one source of the feelings on some maintainers' parts is that the new update criteria get in the way of "timey manner" in the quest to prevent regressions. > It is not true that there is nothing you can do. You can > contact proven testers and ask them to test your package, you can > contact people who use your package (I would hope you know some!) and > ask them to become proven testers to ensure that your updates are pushed > in timely fashion in future. > > QA is not 'someone else's problem', it's a collaborative effort. Fedora > is a community-based volunteer-driven project; neither Red Hat nor The > Fedora Project has a thousand minimum-wage Fedora test slaves in a room > somewhere ready to do all the testing we could ever desire. Actually, what you say here is both true and untrue. If you look at Fedora as a product to be delivered, then QA is a problem for everyone delivering that product to worry about. However, if you look at Fedora as an open source project then you'll find that tasks are divided among contributor interest rather than end-product. It is the problem of the people who care about QA to worry about QA -- the people who have an itch to scratch have the responsibility to scratch it for themselves. These ideas are not diametrically opposed, rather they're two different ways to look at this problem and try to understand that an ideal solution encompasses both viewpoints. On the one hand, convincing everyone to care about QA and make sure that packages they care about are tested to prevent regressions, and on the other hand, giving maintainers the ability to make judgements about the risk vs benefit of the update that they want to push and getting the high benefit packages into users hands asap. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpy95zluihWi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
