On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 14:22 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > * 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 > > > Note about this second bullet: I'm not sure this is good advice. There's > been quite a few times I've encountered bugs in end-user oriented programs > where deleting the config files in my home directory made the bug > "disappear". Similarly, I remember there was a bind update a few releases > back where the package was trying to rewrite the existing config files which > failed when the update was attempted on boxes that had already customized > the config. > > I see what you're trying to get at here but I think what it really boils > down to is -- "you should have two sets of eyes look at this." So perhaps, > upping the karma requirement to +2 and letting maintainers +1 their own > updates helps here. That wasn't quite what I was getting at, but you have a point - both environments can expose bugs. What I was getting at is that developers tend to test in their own 'messy' environments anyway, so the thing they usually *miss* is testing in a more user-y environment. So perhaps advise maintainers to test both. > 2) If the maintainer happens to be a proventester, then they only need to > find a regular user to give the other karma point. ...or, as we're discussing in another thread branch, the maintainer *will* be a proven tester because they're a maintainer :) -- 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
