On 2/18/06, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I know, it doesn't work to well with update-testing in core -- but it's > IMHO better then no testing at all. If this policy goes in I'd want an established loophole that allows hot fix updates to fix brokenness that made it through the "testing" timeout without comment and not just security updates. And yo have to watch out for how this mandatory tree complicates the building of other packages which depend on packages sitting in the testing tree awaiting the timeout to expire. If the buildsystem automatically uses packages in this tree, then you'll have to have a way to expidite packages out of this tree before the timeout if a security hotfix for a depedant package needs to get released to keep depchains clean. If this tree is not automatically included in the buildsystem you'll have to have some mechanism by which maintainers can request it be included when they are doing a set of packages in a dependacy chain, to avoid the mandatory timeout from getting in the way. I'd like to see this implemented on a probational basis and then re-evaluated to see if the timeout based testing tree is a net benefit or a net hinderance. The non-published scratch tree idea I think is good regardless of what happens with a pre-release testing tree. -jef"I am still working on my wtf is up with becoming a sponsers draft..I haven't forgotten"spaleta -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
