[Fwd: Re: Stable Release Updates policy]

[Jordan Mantha]

Reinhard Tartler wrote:
<snip>
>>       * We should make sure that testers know that it's not a matter of
>>         "I started the app and it doesn't crash on start-up". For
>>         example: I uploaded a gdm to dapper-updates a while ago which
>>         worked nicely and fixed a bunch of smaller issues. However did
>>         it break "automatic login" which made people of a school with
>>         kiosk computers quite unhappy. You might have encountered
>>         similar examples already. Fixes sometimes do have side-effects.
>>         We should take testing seriously.
>>     
> I agree with what Daniel wrote and have a few points to add myself:
>
> This means that we require independent testing reports, in form of
> informal prosa describing how the user actually tested the package. The
> consequence of this is that packages with a small user base are less
> likely to get an SRU. 
>
> I don't think this is much of a problem, hostely. For these packages,
> -backports is another posibility to get a fixed package.
>
>   
What about having a MOTU/SRU/Testing wiki page with a brief explination
of what we desire  from testers. The url could be included in the SRU
bug ( "Please test this proposed update. For more information on how and
what to test please see <SRU/Testing> " )
>>       * Who do we notify of testing? Simon Law too? UWN? ubuntu-users?
>>     
>
> We could ask Simon if he has (time) ressources left to handle the
> universe SRUs. If he agrees, sure!
>
> UWN is a good idea. Perhaps there could be a section named "SRUs under
> investigation - please help with testing."
Yes, perhaps if we have enough material of interest to people, we can
produce a little MOTU weekly report that would include SRUs, current bug
stats (how many open, how many new), and perhaps status of various MOTU
activities (merges/syncs left). It could be very factual and not as
"fun" as our old MOTU Reports but it might help MOTUs stay aware of
what's going on in general and it would be an easy resource for UWN,
Fridge, dev people to see what MOTU's up too.

If people think it's worthwhile I can work on this a bit as I'm
interested in creating task lists and other, IMO, useful things for
MOTUs and Hopefuls to see what needs to be done and what our status is.
If a whole MOTU report is too much then maybe somebody in the SRU team
can do a weekly SRU report for this list. That wouldn't be too time
consuming I don't think. What do you guys think?

The only other comment I have on the  SRU policy is that I think we
should also allow SRUs for uninstallable or unusable packages. I've seen
quite a few cases where we found out a package is totally broken
(segfault or similar) only after a release.

-Jordan