no mandatory QA testing at all [Re: crazy thought about how to ease QA testing]
Eric Rostetter
rostetter at mail.utexas.edu
Tue Feb 14 21:45:50 UTC 2006
Quoting Jesse Keating <jkeating at j2solutions.net>:
> On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 02:20 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> Seems to be a misunderstanding here. There are separate repositories
>> for
>> testing and general legacy updates. Yes?
>>
>
> He is speaking in virtual terms. Since we would introduce a timeout, he
> is afraid that the quality of packages coming into released will be
> lower than it is right now, and be considered "testing" packages.
>
> IMHO the quality of packages hitting updates-testing is pretty on par
> with the quality of packages hitting Fedora updates. So I'm not so sure
> what the problem is here.
The problem is two fold:
1) You can't use Fedora standards for the RHL releases, only for the
Fedora releases.
2) This is a major change to the tenents that FL was founded on. Any such
change must be by consensus. We must establish if there is a consensus or
not.
--
Eric Rostetter
The Department of Physics
The University of Texas at Austin
Go Longhorns!
More information about the fedora-legacy-list
mailing list