On 10/3/13 3:30 PM, Kent Fredric wrote: > Now, if you were to see "no people have successfully built combination X", > that in itself is interesting, even if you don't have actual failure > reports of that combination. > > Also, if "5 testers tested this combination and nothing bad happened" is > combined with "however, we have 200 similar installation failures reported > for this combination", you've got some context for research you need to do > to understand why those failures exist ( even if none of them managed to > file a bug report ). > > Essentially, I'm saying we need to lower the thresholds to providing > reliable feedback about what is happening with packages in the field, ie: > Diego's smoke boxes are very very useful, but thats *one* person. Imagine > if we can get 500+ people running similar smoke operations with a > manageable feedback system.
Oh totally, I was not dismissing benefits of that. It'd be great. There is only one small detail: someone would need to create it. Then, based on how other stats-related efforts in Gentoo turned out, it's not that obvious to me how big the coverage would actually be. When I think about using Gentoo in any production environment, I'm pretty sure one has to do his own testing and staging. We try to keep things reasonably sane in Gentoo stable, but even what you're describing above won't cover _everything_, and this is mostly what I'm saying. Paweł
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
