On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 01:16:50PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > I don't think a maintainer can realistically replace wide-spread user > based testing in a variety of environments. In light of that, we can > either accept a maintainer +1 as "I tested this as I would use it and > it worked" (which should be implied by them submitting the update > already anyway), or we can disallow it as the policy says. > > I don't think adding more definitions or steps to the existing policy > is really going to improve anything. Why does pushing an update to testing imply that the maintainer has already used the package and tested it? I cannot find this requirement in the wiki and I do not find it useful. For this requirement every maintainer would need to copy the Fedora infrastructure to distribute updates to his or her testing machines. Also it would delay the possibility for other users to test an update, unless they are forced to use other distribution methods than the updates-testing repository. But then the problem to verify updates emerges, since packages are first signed when they are put into updates-testing. Kind regards Till
Attachment:
pgpYaOqQ2fQS_.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
