On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 16:10 +0100, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On 02/02/2012 05:18 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> We'll keep it around, but I'll update the wiki pages to note that
> >> it's kinda 'dormant' for now. I'm hoping that with Bodhi 2.0
> >> we'll be able to re
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/02/2012 05:18 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>> We'll keep it around, but I'll update the wiki pages to note that
>> it's kinda 'dormant' for now. I'm hoping that with Bodhi 2.0
>> we'll be able to re-design the process and util
Adam Williamson wrote:
> We'll keep it around, but I'll update the wiki pages to note that it's
> kinda 'dormant' for now. I'm hoping that with Bodhi 2.0 we'll be able to
> re-design the process and utilize proventesters in a better way.
How about just requiring 1 proventester +1 *or* 2 regular +1
On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 02:58 +0100, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On 02/02/2012 01:19 AM, Luke Macken wrote:
> > FESCo recently made an adjustment to the updates policy to no
> > longer require proventester karma for a critical path update to be
> > deemed as stable.
> >
> > Critical path updates
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/02/2012 01:19 AM, Luke Macken wrote:
> FESCo recently made an adjustment to the updates policy to no
> longer require proventester karma for a critical path update to be
> deemed as stable.
>
> Critical path updates will now require just one reg
FESCo recently made an adjustment to the updates policy to no longer require
proventester karma for a critical path update to be deemed as stable.
Critical path updates will now require just one regular +1 karma vote during
the pre-beta phase and two regular +1 karma votes in other phases to be pu
