On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 10:12:09AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >> > What if we leave Rawhide as it is, but create the new >> > somewhat-better-than-Rawhide repo that Dennis Gilmore was talking about >> > last year, and enable Bodhi on that? (The thing that I very desperately >> > want to be named "Fedora Bikeshed".) >> My concern would be further diluting and already thin QA community >> with yet another thing to test. > > What if updates to Bikeshed which pass all the automated tests were > pushed automatically in batches every, say, week, unless there is > negative human feedback? That'd give the opportunity to test (and > either push sooner or block), but not make it a new requirement. The premise of dilution is still in effect. You have one more thing without additional resources, so naturally it will pull resources from somewhere. However, I should have been clearer. My concern isn't "how do we get Bikeshed tested". It's "how do we make sure Rawhide continues to be tested if Bikeshed exists and promises to be somehow a more stable rawhide". Rawhide testing today is very minimal. If Bikeshed is a thing that appears to be the sweet spot that is essentially a stable rolling release, what purpose does rawhide then serve to the average user/tester? For that matter, I'd actually be concerned that it would pull testers off of the actual releases as well. josh _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
