On Sat, 2016-12-24 at 13:31 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > I don't recall the example Adam mentions, but I have no reason to doubt > > it. > > I don't recall it either, so that's already 2 people. And I tend to remember > such things. So you should in fact doubt it. > > Do not believe everything you read on the Internet! I was being vague - note the "such howlers as" in the text. I didn't bother going and looking up the specific updates. My recollection is that there were three or four badly broken updates in the space of a year or so, including the one nirik mentioned, which was the trigger for the decision to introduce Bodhi. I am snipping the rest of your mail because we've done this at least five times before and there's no point at all in re-litigating it. I just wanted to explain to Iiro that Bodhi was never designed as a 'prove this update is perfect' mechanism. It was designed as a 'try to catch completely broken updates' mechanism. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
