On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:17:12 +0000, mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 18:20:38 -0800, > > Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> As noted there, and as discussed at meetings and with FESCo, I'm hopeful > >> we'll be able to make use of proven tester status again once Bodhi 2.0 > >> hits. Therefore I don't think we should take down all the documentation, > >> kill the group, or stop accepting membership requests. But do be aware > >> that, at present, proven tester status is basically meaningless. > > > > Note that statistics are still gathered and that future changes might depend > > on whether or not proventesters do a better job than average of correctly > > tagging builds as good or bad. > > That particular issue would be useful to know - is there any current > data on whether at this point in time there is any evidence that > proventester karma is more helpful than the average in this regard? This was brought up at one of the FESCO meetings and at the time it wasn't felt to be enough better to keep requiring proventester for crit path updates. -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
