On Sun, 06 Dec 2015 20:52:19 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:

> > > That doesn't really add up.  
> > 
> > What doesn't add up?  
> 
> We were talking about a yum update that had been sitting around for
> four months, with +10 karma.

That may be the subject, but the messages have referred to many other
updates where the maintainer could push manually. So, there have been
comments on some general problems.

> Your theory about why this kind of thing
> happens doesn't match the facts of that situation: the update submitter
> actually had to take specific action to make it so the update wouldn't
> get pushed.

How do you know? There have been Yum updates with autokarma of 15, afaik.
And then 10 would not be enough.

> If they were just 'fire'n'forget', the update would already
> have gone stable weeks ago.

You cannot tell. Updates with 0 karma could have been entered with a
threshold of 3 and would never go stable due to lack of karma.

I've entered updates with a threshold of 1 in fire'n'forget style and
neither the bug reporter(s) or any testers have voted. What a surprise!
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to