On Tue, 2016-12-20 at 14:27 +0000, Tom Hughes wrote: > Surely it's more likely that it just delays the discovery of the > botched > update? I don't think updates-testing should be batched. Testers should of course still get all test updates ASAP. > The only way it reduces the risk of releasing a botched update is > the > the updates somehow get more testing just by staying in the testing > channel longer. ...and actual QA, from the professionals and volunteers on the QA team, who are very good at finding bugs pre-release but currently do zero QA on our updates because it's an unmanageable rolling stream of a bazillion separate updates. With batched updates, you can test a batch with the same overall criteria used for releases to see if it's botched. That's the advantage of batching over simply extending the amount of time spent in updates-testing. > Which makes the question whether botched updates happen because not > enough people use testing, or because there are enough people using > it > but they don't have enough time to spot the problems before the > updates > get pushed. We indeed do not need batched updates to extend the length of time updates remain in testing. We could (and should) do that immediately. Michael _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
