On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Am 24.09.2013 15:41, schrieb Remi Collet: >> Le 24/09/2013 12:35, Reindl Harald a écrit : >> >>> and that is why ist *is wrong* to give negative karma because some >>> extension is not updated - who says that the extension RPM is >>> relevant for all users? >> >> I don't agree. Broken dep are not acceptable in "stable" release > > if one person maintains thunderbird and the other one lightning > how do you imagine that both packages are built at the same > moment and get the same karma? People can talk to each other or give commit access to each others packages. > this is a organisation problem and again: > > a broken depdendency for lightning is *never* a reason > to give thunderbird bad karma - s/never/always/ ... We shouldn't even allow updates to go through (even updates-testing) with broken deps. Every update should have to pass autoqa's depcheck before it gets pushed at all. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
