On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 16:16 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 01:10:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 15:58 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > > > > > I like to see that always be a requirement for the stable, stable+updates > > > > and rawhide (assuming the rawhide-pending tag becomes a reality). > > > > > > I would like to see this eventually too. However, we don't have a > > > capability to stop it from happening, other than our current method of > > > relying on people to do the right thing. That could effectively mean > > > that anyone could inadvertently hold up shipping a release at "the > > > edge of space" through a bad push. > > > > This isn't actually the case, as no-one can push directly to any of > > those places, certainly just prior to release. (Well, except security > > updates.) Everything goes to updates-testing first; we can catch broken > > deps there and refuse to push them into stable. > > I was going to argue that we've had this problem occur in the case of > security updates with e.g. web browser stack, but on the other hand > that would be in the critical path anyway. > > I may be out of touch here, for which I apologize in advance. What > mechanism currently prevents broken deps in updates-testing from being > pushed into stable? Just the usual testing. But just prior to release the freeze is in place, and packages are only taken from -testing to stable after manual review by qa and rel-eng, and only to fix blocker or nth bugs; this is a pretty intensive and managed process and we'd be very unlikely to push a package from -testing to stable at that point which had broken deps. I don't think it's ever happened. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
