Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > PS: I suspect the documentation was actually just an attempt to document > the previous broken Bodhi policy implementation. (See > https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/772 and > https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/1033 – both got closed, but > the issue was never properly fixed.) PPS: Sorry, one more thing, I have to correct myself: Actually, the issue was eventually fixed in that Bodhi has at some point started allowing to set the stable threshold even when unchecking the autopush checkbox, so it was possible before 8.2 to manually push updates to stable at +1. Though I still do not understand how a threshold makes any sense at all for manual pushes. Manual pushes should just always require only the minimum required by policy, as the person setting the threshold (to any allowed value) is the same as the one doing the push. Settable thresholds have only ever made sense for automatic pushes. (So the bug was not that the threshold was not settable for manual pushes, but that the non-settable threshold was fixed to the wrong value, the default for automatic pushes (+3) instead of the minimum allowed (+1). Which is why I still do not consider this properly fixed.) Still, somehow a +2 threshold made its way into the documentation, and I am still wondering on what base that was encoded there. Kevin Kofler -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
