On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 23:06 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Matthias Clasen wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 20:33 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> Maintainers, please don't let your F7 updates linger in updates-testing > >> forever. I've posted nag comments to the updates 2 weeks or more old, but I > >> guess a lot of the 1-2 weeks old updates could also use getting pushed to > >> stable. > >> > >> Either the update is broken or it's not. If it's broken, it should be withdrawn > >> (unpushed) from updates-testing. If it works, why not mark it as stable? And I > >> don't think waiting for feedback for more than 2 weeks makes sense, 1 week was > >> pretty much the consensus in the discussions here and on fedora-maintainers. If > >> there are no complaints in 2 weeks, the package can't be that broken, or if it > >> is it most likely won't affect many people or someone would have noticed. :-) > >> > >> And no, pushing to stable after a timeout is currently not automatic. > > > > The old fedora updates tool sent nag mail...I assume that updates will > > be pushed to stable more regularly once that is implemented in bodhi. > > > > Nag mail is not the answer, an option saying push this automatically to stable > after X days is the answer. And yes I know not everyone wants this to happen > for their packages, thus it should be an option. Pushing automatically is inferior to nag mail since nag mail makes me go back to the update, look at possible feedback in fedora-test-list and bugzilla, and then make a conscious decision to push it. Automating this just further devalues updates-testing. IMO -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
