Jesse Keating <jkeating <at> redhat.com> writes:
> This is a broader issue, but I don't think it's set in stone anywhere that
> every single update (or new package) has to go through updates-testing. We
> strongly encourage it and start throwing daggers if you don't do it and
> introduce issues on a stable platform, but I don't think there is anything
> physically stopping you from going straight to updates.
With the current Koji interface, that's a 2-step process, he'd have to request
a push to updates-testing, wait for it to get committed by release engineering,
and then request another push from updates-testing to updates. There isn't a
way to bypass updates-testing entirely, except by abusing the "security" flag,
which would certainly be frowned upon. ;-)
> > Not true many reviewers review on the latest stable, it says nowhere that a
> > review should be done on rawhide.
>
> Yet the only place the package is allowed to go by default is rawhide, so it
> most certainly should be tested on rawhide.
But the reality is that not all reviewers have a Rawhide system ready for
testing. Moreover, the main part of reviewing is validating the guidelines,
actually testing the package is only a "SHOULD" item (as is building in mock,
only building in any way on any supported architecture is required: "- MUST:
The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least
one supported architecture.").
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
