On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 12:30 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 11:25:03AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 14:10 -0500, Doug Ledford wrote: > > > 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. > > > FWIW I'm for it with your explanation and added it to the Update > brainstorming page last night: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Kevin/Updates_Policy_Changes_Ideas_Container If we go this way, I'd propose adding additional guidelines to the proventester policy specific to maintainers testing their own packages. * Test the actual build that will go out, from Koji - don't test your own local build of the same spec * Try and test in a reasonably user-ish environment, not your own highly customized one; if this means using a separate user account or a VM, do -- 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
