Am 10.01.2014 15:56, schrieb Chuck Anderson: > On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 10:42:33AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: >> On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 10:13 -0500, Chuck Anderson wrote: >>> This appears to have also broken Fedora 19 updates-testing, which is >>> even less acceptable than breaking rawhide. >> >> Eh, I'd suggest not. updates-testing is actually explicitly meant as a >> place to catch this kind of problem, whereas we're trying to keep >> Rawhide rolling and especially try not to break nightly image >> generation. At least we can vote broken things in updates-testing down. > > Wow, really? updates-testing is allowed to be more broken than > rawhide? So why don't we just do all development in updates-testing, > and don't push these changes to rawhide until they pass the > updates-testing karma? > > This is not how I understand these things should work. I think this > attitude will push even fewer people to run with updates-testing > enabled normally nothing should be broken and if it has to be fixed i run updates-testing daily on all of my non-production machines for years and in case of for me really interesting packages i take them straight from koji
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
