Deep Freeze coming for Fedora 7 (and cvs branching coming too)

[Axel Thimm]

On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 03:04:08AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Patrice Dumas wrote:
> 
> >>Have you looked at how many major regressions we have 
> >>for every release?
> >
> >Not precisely.
> 
> Please do. This is a QA process and to understand the need for it you 
> need to know what drives it. Spend sometime reading through end users 
> forums.

The question is: how do these regression distribute among Core and
Extras (based on weight like number of packages in repo and also
number of packages used by users of course).

I'm under the impression that the regressions that made most of the
noise were part of Core and that already had the QA systems being
discussed in place (updates-testing, mandatory announcements etc).

And OTOH we decide that packages don't need rebuilds pushing any
broken package out there to break in users' hands instead of during
the development cycle and OTOH we raise burocratic hurdles w/o a real
gain.

Ask yourself: Will an announcement of a package update really increate
package *quality*, e.g. add to a better QA? Not really.

Don't understand me wrong: I like package update announcements. But
they will not magically increase package quality and reduce
regressions. Same for an unused updates-testing repo.

A better QA? Force package maintainers to push their packages into
updates-testing and have them enable updates-testing *on their own
systems*. That way you get a couple of hundreds skilled people actually
using updates-testing ...
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070515/3ccfcfc9/attachment.sig>