On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 23:27 -0500, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> said: > > In fact, you can see this has already happened: > > > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.13.90-11 > > > > has -6 karma at present. When it hit -3, it got unpushed. > > Yeah, but -10 had the drop of RPC, so the damage is already done. -10 > was broke (in that IIRC netdb.h still tried to include rpc.h), so an > update will still be needed or a completely broke setup will be shipped. -10 is the update that got most of the negative karma. The update was then edited to include -11, which supposedly 'fixes' the issue (though according to Tom it doesn't, really). Neither -10 nor -11 has made it to f15 stable. This is all right there on that page. > What was the justification for pushing an updated glibc post-beta? There doesn't really have to be one. > Aren't critpath updates supposed to be approved post-beta (or am I > misremembering the process)? Critpath updates have to be approved - by the usual standard of +1 from a proven tester and +1 from any tester - at all stages after branching. This does not change after beta. Neither -10 nor -11 met this standard, so neither has been pushed to stable. -- 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
