On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 17:59 +0200, Till Maas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 08:08:00AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > I don't know, but it seems worth considering, and my basic point here > > is this is something the Change owner should be responsible for > > figuring out: making at least a reasonable effort to evaluate which > > important (particularly release-critical) software and workflows will > > be affected by the change and proposing plans for testing them. "we > > should check curl behaves as expected" just doesn't really cut it as a > > test plan. > > Should we add a QA review step to the change process to address this? That's, er, sort of what I'm doing. The Change has been proposed. I'm reviewing it. :P > IMHO we cannot expect Change owners to know this or have the same eye > for detail as quality engineers have, therefore the best approach is to > provide them guidance. Or can we assume that the open discussion here > where this can be pointed out is enough? There is a brief mention in the Changes policy page: "Fedora QA reviews announced changes on the devel-announce list to commit to testing of the change, or adjust release criteria as necessary." https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/VHNWYAZE7PJE242BWQKQDS4LMMKUUV5D/
