FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-11-2008, 12:01 PM
Robert Scheck
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

On Tue, 09 Dec 2008, Till Maas wrote:
> This is something that hit me, too. While F10 was not released, I booted a
> live medium several times and sound worked there better than with F8 (A
> soundcard I considered dead started working again), but then after I install
> F10 Gold, I experience the same problems as you.

Aside from that, I experienced something similar for the proprietary ATI
driver. Worked pre F10 including beta (IIRC until preview) and afterwards
there are now issues such e.g. just a black screen resulting in unusable;
so RPM Fusion even removed it from F10. I don't know what changed between
Beta and Final, but was that chance really necessary to break the (slow)
work and more less slower progress of the ATI guys? ;-)


Greetings,
Robert

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-11-2008, 12:17 PM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 01:57:27PM +0100, Robert Scheck wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Dec 2008, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > Sometime it is better to push directly to stable, when the package is
> > already broken, when it is a security fix, or for packages with few
> > users.
>
> I agree with that so far, but such unluckily gotten base packages as dbus
> (you know, I dislike dbus) need definately more love and especially much
> more QA before getting stable. Such base packages IMHO need to succeed

I don't disagree with that. I personnally avoid at best pushing to
stable releases. What I mean is that there is not a 'one size fits all'
policy for package updates.

But I fully agree that fedora is moving too fast (in stable releases)
without proper QA and integration, and I have repeatedly said so.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-11-2008, 02:14 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

Robert Scheck wrote:
> Aside from that, I experienced something similar for the proprietary ATI
> driver. Worked pre F10 including beta (IIRC until preview) and afterwards
> there are now issues such e.g. just a black screen resulting in unusable;
> so RPM Fusion even removed it from F10. I don't know what changed between
> Beta and Final, but was that chance really necessary to break the (slow)
> work and more less slower progress of the ATI guys? ;-)

Proprietary drivers are not, have never been and will never be supported in
Fedora.

Kevin Kofler

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-11-2008, 02:27 PM
Rex Dieter
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

Matej Cepl wrote:

> On 2008-12-09, 12:03 GMT, Sven Lankes wrote:
>> We should try to get the bohdi-karma-mechanism more popular.
>
> IMNSHO we should get rid of it -- there is already one very good
> mechanism for registering bugs in the software and it is
> bugzilla.

Bodhi feedback is a *complement* to bugzilla, not a replacement.

-- rex


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-11-2008, 02:36 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

Matej Cepl wrote:
> Even worse would be if you succeed and somebody would actually start to
> use it, because they would expect maintainers to take it into account.

Actually, they already do, and rightly so. It doesn't make sense to push
updates to stable when they're known to break things, figuring that out is
what updates-testing is for, if the feedback gets ignored, we can just as
well shut it down and push everything to stable. (No, I'm not suggesting
doing that. ;-) )

Kevin Kofler

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-11-2008, 02:38 PM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 09:27:19AM -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Matej Cepl wrote:
>
> > On 2008-12-09, 12:03 GMT, Sven Lankes wrote:
> >> We should try to get the bohdi-karma-mechanism more popular.
> >
> > IMNSHO we should get rid of it -- there is already one very good
> > mechanism for registering bugs in the software and it is
> > bugzilla.
>
> Bodhi feedback is a *complement* to bugzilla, not a replacement.

For gnash and kchmviewer, I have noticed that users give feedback in
bugzilla. But maybe bodhi is more suiteable for tester testing integration
issues, as opposed with testing one application. they may be subscribed
to bodhi changes and giving feedback in bodhi may be a relevant workflow
in that case.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-11-2008, 02:55 PM
Rex Dieter
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

Ralf Corsepius wrote:

>> Bodhi feedback is a *complement* to bugzilla, not a replacement.
>
> Feedback has nothing to do with "bodhi's karma counters".

Shrug, karma is optional. Many maintainers appreciate it (I do), if you
don't, then don't use it.

-- Rex


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-11-2008, 03:08 PM
Sven Lankes
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 11:58:51AM +0100, Matej Cepl wrote:

>> We should try to get the bohdi-karma-mechanism more popular.

> IMNSHO we should get rid of it -- there is already one very good
> mechanism for registering bugs in the software and it is
> bugzilla.

Which can cater for negative feedback. I don't think most people would
be too happy with bz-entries created just containing 'works for me'.

--
sven === jabber/xmpp: sven@lankes.net

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-11-2008, 04:04 PM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 6:55 AM, Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> wrote:
> Shrug, karma is optional. Many maintainers appreciate it (I do), if you
> don't, then don't use it.

Technically.... bugzilla is optional too. I'm doing a good job of ignoring it.

And I think this line of argumentation is sort of moot. I think the
problem is we aren't getting enough feedback into bodhi to know
whether or not bodhi is competing with bugzilla.

I don't think the problem is the design of bodhi "the webservice", I
think the problem is we don't have a streamlined way to pull feedback
from users in a timely manner to impact updates-testing.

In aggregate how many karma votes do we get averaged for all current
updates-testing packages in a given week?

1) We need bodhi integration into PK, so people who choose to use
updates-testing get timely reminders and client side help in send in
feedback for each and every update in testing they consume.

2) We need updates-testing enablement to be an in your face install
time option, where we make the case to users to use updates-testing to
help other users avoid problems

3)...

4) profit


-jef

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-11-2008, 04:34 PM
Christoph Wickert
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

Am Donnerstag, den 11.12.2008, 16:40 +0100 schrieb Ralf Corsepius:
> On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 09:27 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> > Matej Cepl wrote:
> >
> > > On 2008-12-09, 12:03 GMT, Sven Lankes wrote:
> > >> We should try to get the bohdi-karma-mechanism more popular.
> > >
> > > IMNSHO we should get rid of it
>
> +1. It's superfluous.
>
> > -- there is already one very good
> > > mechanism for registering bugs in the software and it is
> > > bugzilla.
> Agreed. Bug reporters report success/failure through bugzilla.

How is this supposed to work? File a bug "your package works fine" each
and every time?

_If_ we wanted to use bugzilla to provide feedback it needs to be much
smarter, faster and more easy to use than now. And to be honest I have
no idea how to do that.

> > Bodhi feedback is a *complement* to bugzilla, not a replacement.
>
> Feedback has nothing to do with "bodhi's karma counters".

It has, only nothing to do with automatically pushing updates based on
karma.

>
> Ralf

Regards,
Christoph

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:28 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org