On Sun, 2014-02-23 at 23:33 +0100, drago01 wrote: > > and no "you have to apologize" from the maintainer does change that > > > > if the maintainers would run a baisc virtual machine consuming > > ordinary repos without manual overrides such mistakes would be > > recognized by them.............. > > Well the proper way to fix is to have automated and enforced dep > checks ... <insert reply from AdamW here telling me that it is not > ready for that yet ;) >
Exactly. (Indeed, as noted, in this case the depcheck test somehow appears to see the broken deps, but report the result as PASSED. I'm not just whistlin' Dixie, you know. I believe John Dulaney is still working on v2 of depcheck, with the help of tflink.) I think it's a reasonable note that if you're pushing a major update of a significant and complex package, leaving auto-push enabled with a threshold of +3 is perhaps not the best idea. Packagers, remember: the Bodhi defaults are just that, *defaults*. They aren't necessarily appropriate for every update. Do remember to use your judgement. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
