On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 17:21 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > Adam Williamson wrote: > > more or less, each package added to the update exponentially increases > > the likelihood of false negative karma from someone whose local mirror > > doesn't have one of the packages, or who hit a really tiny bug which > > shouldn't be a case for a -1. > > The first part sounds like a mirror problem that bodhi could never > solve. If a mirror doesn't have all of the RPM files how could the yum > repo data it provides possibly be valid? How could bodhi solve this? It > can't. Weird stuff happens to mirrors. This is all I know. =) > The second part leaves me scratching my head. Minor dependencies should > be just as important as large ones. If it is a dependency it needs to be > linked and if it introduces bugs it should be important to fix them. I didn't say anything about dependencies. People file negative karma on stuff like 'Obscure Menu Item Z doesn't work', or 'there's a typo in the docs'. The more packages there are in an update, the more likely this is to happen, and the more likely bad negative karma will hold up 75 other packages... -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
