On Fri, 26 Feb 2010, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 08:14:13AM -0500, Marcela Maslanova wrote:
> >
> >----- "Matthias Clasen" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 13:16 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >>
> >> I think banning stable pushes is the right idea. None of your reasons
> >> is
> >> very convincing.
> >>
> >My packages are rarely tested and I forget them in testing phase for a
> >long time. Also fixing BR don't need testing. I simply need push
> >immediately the new/fixed package.
>
> If nobody is testing your packages sitting in updates-testing, then maybe the
> users of that package aren't hitting whatever you're fixing or aren't
> otherwise
> having other issues. What is the benefit of pushing an update if nobody
> cares?
>
I think the problem there is most users aren't in the system and probably
don't know / care about testing. They'll leave that to others, they don't
want to be involved, they just want to use our stuff.
> Also, doing an _update_ to fix a BR seems rather absurd. If there is no
> functional change to the package when doing the BR change, then there is
> really
> no reason to push an update for that. The same is true for spec file comment
> changes, or any other change that has no real impact to the package at
> runtime.
>
I agree, and there's plenty of other reasons not to push an update.
-Mike
--
devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
