[arch-dev-public] Possible signoff addendum
k3nsai at gmail.com
Sun Aug 31 11:35:41 EDT 2008
On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 18:24 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
> > One of the things I was thinking about, because sometimes signoffs can
> > stagnate....
> > Should we have a time-based limit?
> > That is, if a package has been in testing for X days, with no
> > complaints, but no signoffs, yet, can we consider it fully functional,
> > assuming the packager is comfortable with that.
> > I'd like opinions on this. I'm trying to solve the issue of the big
> > ol' backlog of pending-signoff packages.
> I quite like this idea. A "no bug report after given period of time =
> no problems" strategy should work as the community can do a lot more
> testing in total than we can.
+1, probably by X days enough enough users have tested the package, and
if there are no bugs it can be considered stable.
More information about the arch-dev-public