Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> 2) We could continue on the "single update for multiple packages"
> approach, but revamp the karma system so that each SRPM gets its own
> karma, rather than the update as a whole. Then, the whole update would
> not be pushed via autokarma until all of the dependent packages had
> sufficient karma (or the owner of the update could push them after the
> stable wait period, of course).
This just does not scale for large update groups such as the KDE SC updates.
I think it would also acerbate the already existing "How do I provide
feedback for a library?" problem (because now it'd also affect libraries
included in update groups, not just those filed separately).
I don't understand why we need to make up more and more complicated rules
for updates rather than just killing the whole karma and autokarma business
and having the maintainer READ the update feedback and make an informed (and
unhindered by bureaucracy) decision based on that.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
