----- "Sandro \"red\" Mathys" <red@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > List of ON_QA bugs - http://bit.ly/dx4ehO > > [16:17:55] <red_alert> many of those ON_QA bugs have been VERIFIED > before bodhi changed it back [to ON_QA]...do we need to re-test > those? > > > [16:19:47] <jlaska> red_alert: I think that's a really good > discussion > for the list. kparal mentioned that earlier, let's discuss it there > so > others can benefit as well > > ##### > > I've often seen people setting the status back to VERIFIED in such a > case but I'm not exactly sure if that's the best possible behavior. > > So, does it make sense to re-test fixes because the newly pushed > version > might have broken things again or do we generally assume that fixes > included in older versions are still working in newer versions? > > IMHO it doesn't make sense to re-test again. There'll always be newer > versions and we can't always re-test every bug with every new > version. > > +1 for just setting back to VERIFIED again It's a little more complicated. Let's suppose we have bug #1234 and foobar-1.1 claims to fix it. If you post proposed update to Bodhi and fill into details that it fixes #1234, then Bodhi will set #1234 to ON_QA. Some tester will test that and will set the status to VERIFIED. Now, there was some serious issue with foobar-1.1, unrelated to #1234. The developer will *unpush* that proposed update, create foobar-1.2 and post it to proposed updates again. Because there is still no foobar update released that would fix #1234, the developer will again mark foobar-1.2 as fixing #1234. Bodhi will change #1234 back from VERIFIED to ON_QA. This is correct, because although foobar-1.1 is verified to fix that issue, there were some additional changes that could negatively impact that fix. So the tester should test foobar-1.2 and mark #1234 as VERIFIED again, if everything works ok. On the other hand, let's suppose that foobar-1.1 was released and pushed into 'updates' repository. Now, when the developer creates foobar-1.2, he *should not* mark bug #1234 as being fixed by foobar-1.2. That was was already fixed by foobar-1.1 and the fix was *released*. If such event happens (developer mistakenly marks foobar-1.2 as fixing #1234 and Bodhi sets the bug again to ON_QA), there is really no need to test it again. We can set it back to VERIFIED. I think I have described how it should work. But maybe I'm wrong. Does it make sense? What do you think? -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
