Le mercredi 03 juillet 2013 à 09:44 +0200, Johannes Lips a écrit : > > > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 9:32 AM, drago01 <drago01@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Dan Mashal > <dan.mashal@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Pierre-Yves Luyten > <py@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Not sure if it makes any sense but maybe could we have > something like > >> "freeze tag changes until desc is better". > >> > >> I propose this because testers will not _really_ want to -1 > karma, and > >> as a maintainer it might be a bit hard, but with a good > reminder like > >> "not pushed to stable until desc is better" I would have > made less > >> mistakes > >> > >> yes not being reminded is not an excuse and such proposal > would not save > >> time, still I believe it could help more than hurt > > > > > > There is already a perfect example of this. > > > > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-11846/selinux-policy-3.12.1-57.fc19 > > > This is also a perfect example of useless "does not fix bug x" > karma. > If it is not *worse* then the previous package there is no > reason to > give it negative karma. > If it doesn't fix the bugs, the update should fix, it is appropriate > to give negative karma. Otherwise the bugs would be closed, when it > becomes stable, but won't be fixed. That's not what the guidelines say : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Update_feedback_guidelines#Update_does_not_fix_a_bug_it_claims_to -- Michael Scherer -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
