On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 15:09:24 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > >> Michael Schwendt wrote: >> >> > On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 19:11:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> > >> >> I now see ... the version in f19 was greater than that in f20+rawhide, >> >> for whatever reasons. >> >> Actually, I wonder why AutoQA did not complain. >> > >> > There are no AutoQA comments in that bodhi ticket at all. Almost as if >> > AutoQA has not been run for that update. Normally it would add a comment >> > also for PASSED tests. >> >> Is AutoQA enabled globally yet? > > It isn't anymore? It used to be. > >> Last I knew, it was an opt-in service. > > Where may I read about that? I've searched a bit, found some old blog posts, > but couldn't locate the programs they referred to, such as autoqa-optin. > "yum search autoqa" -> No matches found > > Search a bit more, found this > http://jlaska.wordpress.com/2010/06/01/fedora-package-maintainers-want-test-results/ > > but following the instructions, they are out-of-date and don't report > settings that match reality. It lists "devel F-16 F-17" as available > releases, but there have been AutoQA comments for a recent update of > "audacious" for F-19. And the package is not listed as "opted in" for that > release either. There was an issue with AutoQA that Tim Flink supposedly fixed. It *should* be enabled. I will ask him to look into it. Dan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
