On 2013-07-03 0:54, Johannes Lips wrote:
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
[2]
Could be, but if the still broken bugs are going to be closed, when
the update becomes stable, doesn't really help, or? Given that this is
enabled in the update.
That is a bureaucratic detail that can be fixed. Priority #1 should
*always* be pushing out better software: it is wrongheaded to avoid
pushing out better software because it would cause a minor inconvenience
in our bug tracking system. We should prioritize pushing out the update
if it's better than the previous update, and we can deal with re-opening
incorrectly closed bugs.
If an update *only* claims to fix one bug, and doesn't actually fix it,
it is appropriate to give it a -1. But if it claims to fix 10 bugs,
fixes 9, but doesn't fix the tenth (and doesn't make anything else worse
in a major way, of course) then we really want to push that update out,
because it makes things better for people. We can deal with the tenth
bug later.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
