On Thu May 29 2008, "G" wrote: > Ok but for some packages some testers have responded saying "It works > for me " some people have told it does not work me " . If you look at > these 2 statements, its contradicting, thats point one and the next > one is "It" is still undefined for other testers :). My suggestion is > why cannot we define "It" as a test case or an enhancement atleast. I > sincerely feel that it would make a big difference. > Probably we could review our updates system and try adding a field > which gives more info.I also strongly feel that it would help our > contributors in a real positive way. Imho everytime some package receives bad karma, it needs to be explained what did not work, otherwise nobody can fix it. For good karma, imho the testcases could be better collected somewhere else than in each update, because they will not differ much for each release, e.g. for a yum update one would always check whether update/install/remove works. Regards, Till
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
