Le jeudi 8 septembre 2011 22:12:26, Maarten Vanraes a écrit : > Op donderdag 08 september 2011 12:59:10 schreef Samuel Verschelde: > > (QA Team and Triage team in CC, but please answer only to > > [email protected]) > > > > I was asked to define a process for backports validation, so here is a > > proposal. We can discuss it a few days and then I'll add the result to > > the backports policy page. > > > > Process for backports : > > > > Triage: > > - identify backport requests > > - add "Backport Request: " in the bug report summary > > - add the "backport" keyword > > - assign to maintainer > > > > The maintainer can refuse to do the backport : > > - doesn't want to maintain it => assign the bug report back to > > [email protected] so that another packager can step in > > - has a good reason for not providing this backport (policy, possible > > breakage...) => close as wontfix > > > > Packager: > > - create bug report if not done already > > - submit to {core,nonfree,tainted}/backports_testing > > - find a tester : original bug reporter when there is one, yourself if > > there's none, or ask in forums/irc/MLs... > > - once tested by at least one person (it must be said explicitly in the > > bug > > > > report), hand it to QA : > > - make sure the bug report summary starts with "Backport Request: " or > > > > "Backport Candidate: " > > > > - add the "backport" keyword if missing > > - assign to [email protected] > > - list the source RPMs if there are several > > > > - be ready to fix bugs and answer QA team questions > > > > QA: > > - test backports the same way that we test updates. But don't forget that > > updates have a higher priority than that of backports. > > - move the packages from backports_testing to backports > > > > Packager again: > > - be ready to fix bugs : once you pushed a backport, you have to maintain > > it until the distribution's end of life :) > > > > Does this seem a good process, from the packager, QA and triage point of > > view? > > > > Best regards > > > > Samuel Verschelde > > anything about i586 vs x86_64 ? ie: at least 2 tests? or not? > > at least updates is this way, iinm...
Yes, this is included in "- test backports the same way that we test updates." :) Samuel
