no mandatory QA testing at all [Re: crazy thought about how to ease QA testing]

[Mike McCarty]

Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 02:31 -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
> 
>>Ok then, it seems to me that there is no longer any distinction
>>between the released repository, and the test repository.
>>So, please send out an e-mail three days before the first
>>"timed release" so I can pull a last tested version before
>>removing the legacy repository from my yum configuration. 
> 
> 
> I appreciate your concern mike, however if we have people testing during
> the timeout period, then there would be no untested packages.  If I see

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean. Perhaps I misunderstood
what the proposal is. My understanding is that there are new
versions of software which supposedly repair security defects in
something called "testing". And that until they are tested by some
volunteers, they remain there. I understand that the proposal is
to institute a time limit such that if software resides in "testing"
without any further testing actually being done, then it automatically
enters "released" after a set time period.

> too many packages go w/out testing on a given platform, I'm going to
> drop that platform as not having enough community interest.  This is a

If this is the case, then what is the proposal?

> very self service project.  You get out of it what you put into it.

More accurately, I get out of it what I pull from the repositories.

Mike
-- 
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!