On 1 Mar 2014 19:49, "Barry Warsaw" <ba...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > > On Mar 01, 2014, at 03:35 PM, Roberto Alsina wrote: > > >There was also a lack of thorough verification on my side as one of the > >landers: I asked "did you guys check this" because I could not. I did not > >ask "did you guys follow the whole test plan?" > > > >So, a learning opportunity all around :-( > > Several of us also had good discussions yesterday about getting the whole > stack QA and automatically tested. That's a huge step toward ensuring no > regressions. Let's make sure that click updates are also on that plan.
Well, it was nobodys fault, it was very well tested for updates... I don't like the fact that udm is dooimd the click package installations but it is done because there is no guarantee that the scope will be around to deal with the download. We should think a better approach and let udm do one only thing, download and find a better approach for the installations. Manuel > > -Barry > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone > Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
