On 03/01/2010 11:52 AM, Peter Jones wrote: > If you think this isn't the right way > to provide a safety net for package maintainers - what is?
With the understanding that you're not specifically asking me that question, I'd say that I'd prefer to first try to automate checks for the most frequent update issues: * Causes broken deps * Breaks clean upgrade path between releases * Has ABI/API change (and is a Critical Path package) * Fails to pass any package specific sanity tests (as written by either the maintainer, QA, rel-eng, or qualified contributors) AutoQA has the potential to do this. I'd rather see energy and effort spent on taking out these low hanging fruit. If, after that, we're still having broken updates pushed directly to stable, then I'd be willing to consider a policy with an enforced delay in "testing". ~spot -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
