Don't put new packages through updates-testing

Rahul Sundaram sundaram at
Fri Jun 1 15:16:42 UTC 2007

Hans de Goede wrote:

> You know very well that I was not talking about the adding to the wiki, 
> but about the to large number of steps needed to get a package in.

I honestly didnt know that very well.

> And for some reason nobody is responding to my point that when in 
> updates-testing a package cannot be in comps and thus is invisible to 
> those using the tools we advice them to use!

That's a problem that needs to fixed by adding packages to comps when 
> I'm not saying QA should be bypassed, I'm saying that delaying packages 
> for a week to allow testing by a non existent team is silly.

By calling the effort useless you making it come true.

> Maybe that reaction was solicited because it seems that those making the 
> rules seem to be disconnected from those doing the work? A typical case 
> of manager syndrome.

Testing for functionality is not desirable and shouldn't be in the 
review guidelines?
> Factors such as? I thought freedom was the great good which we are all 
> working for. There are factors like 
robustness in there. If freedom was the only factor we wouldn't have 
packaging guidelines which guide and therefore limit packagers freedom 
in many cases.


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list