Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> PS: I suspect the documentation was actually just an attempt to document
> the previous broken Bodhi policy implementation. (See
> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/772 and
> https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/1033 – both got closed, but
> the issue was never properly fixed.)
PPS: Sorry, one more thing, I have to correct myself:
Actually, the issue was eventually fixed in that Bodhi has at some point
started allowing to set the stable threshold even when unchecking the
autopush checkbox, so it was possible before 8.2 to manually push updates to
stable at +1.
Though I still do not understand how a threshold makes any sense at all for
manual pushes. Manual pushes should just always require only the minimum
required by policy, as the person setting the threshold (to any allowed
value) is the same as the one doing the push.
Settable thresholds have only ever made sense for automatic pushes. (So the
bug was not that the threshold was not settable for manual pushes, but that
the non-settable threshold was fixed to the wrong value, the default for
automatic pushes (+3) instead of the minimum allowed (+1). Which is why I
still do not consider this properly fixed.)
Still, somehow a +2 threshold made its way into the documentation, and I am
still wondering on what base that was encoded there.
Kevin Kofler
--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
