On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 14:10 -0500, Doug Ledford wrote: > My package in question (mdadm) is only used in certain circumstances, > but if it isn't right, systems fail to boot. I can certainly see why > something that can render a machine unbootable should be critpath. > However, because only a few people use it, testing is sparse at best. I think probably more people use it than current testing indicates, and we should do a better job of getting more people involved in testing. > I'll get one or two testers actually testing the package, but I won't > know until a release is made whether or not it truly works for the > masses because it isn't until then that I hit enough critical mass to know. > > That being the case, I test the package fairly rigorously myself. But > this process doesn't take that into account. I test far more things > than you get with a few people just doing smoke tests, but the smoke > tests are actually the gating factor. If you changed the process so a > maintainer can indicate they've done their own fairly extensive testing, > that would satisfy me. But that also opens the door for abuse, so you > would have to watch maintainers once you enabled this ability. I've posted in the thread earlier that I'd actually like to do this, others seem opposed however. -- 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
