On Sun, 06 Dec 2015 16:02:42 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sun, 2015-12-06 at 19:52 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 15:50:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > > > but what is the reason for maintainers building updates without the > > > intention to push them? > > > > There are maintainers, who dislike a lot of things related to the release > > processes. They consider bodhi a pain to use. They would prefer doing > > things differently, with less work, and more like fire'n'forget as how > > they do it within Rawhide. > > That doesn't really add up.
What doesn't add up? > Auto-karma is the *default* in Bodhi. The > maintainer had to take specific action to disable it. If they want > things to be fire-and-forget, why disable auto-karma? Nobody said that they do that. I refer to things bodhi cannot do today. Keeping default karma settings is the closest thing to fire'n'forget, except if karma threshold will not be reached. > > Nobody ensures that > > they enter the stable updates repo even with 0 karma. Meanwhile, F21 > > has reached end-of-life without anyone making sure to do a last push > > of security fixes for it. > > I've never understood why the idea of a 'last push of security fixes' > for an EOL release makes any sense. It's *EOL*. It doesn't matter if > there's a last-day push or not: everyone should stop using it the next > day, end of story. That's what EOL means. It need not happen on the "last day". It could have happened a month before release. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
