On 02/07/16 06:18, Christian Hesse wrote: > Gaetan Bisson <[email protected]> on Tue, 2016/06/28 08:09: >> For a while now packages in [testing] have gotten little to no signoffs >> and I've been moving mine to [core] after a week without feedback. I >> suspect many of you have been doing this too. > > Yes, probably everybody does. ;) > > I do not run a system with [testing] enabled by default. I need my main > system in production every day - stable and reliable. > Packages that I really do want and/or need end up in my personal repository > for testing, though. I do give spare signoffs, but that packages received > real testing then. > > Possibly we should modify the process a bit: Expect a package to be fine > when it received enough signoffs - as is. Additionally add a NACK feature that > expresses something is (possibly) borked. If the package did not receive a > NACK within 48 or 72 hours it is expected to be fine as well. > Our bug wrangler Doug could have an eye on bugs that look critical and set > NACKs for the packages.
This sounds like the Fedora policy where packages have to surpass a certain karma level to move into the main repositories. I'm not sure who gets to vote for that though. A
