Michael Scherer a écrit :
...
- Someone request a backport ...
- a packager decide to do it. ...
- I am not sure on this part, but basically, we have 2 choices :
- the packager take the cauldron package and push to backport testing
- the packager move the cauldron package in svn to backport, and there
send it to backport testing.
Proposal 1 mean less work duplication, but proposal 2 let us do more
customization.
...
This way :
- packages are not sent untested, thus raising confidence in backports
- the QA should not be overloaded, and can focus on updates
- sysadmins are not overloaded
- people requesting backport see how QA work, and are involved into the
distribution as testers, thus creating a much healthier discussion with
packagers, and creating more incentive to help. And since they request
the package, they will be motivated to test more than stuff they do not
use.
WDYT ?
Overall I think that it is an excellent approach, for the reasons given.
I don't yet understand the difference between proposal 1 and 2, so for the moment I don't have a
preference.
Even though bugzilla might seem a bit cumbersome for requesting backports, otherwise I think that
it is an excellent tool for this purpose.
We could perhaps have some sort of shortcut for filing backport requests.
--
André
