<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/strict.dtd"><html><head><meta name="qrichtext" content="1" /><style type="text/css">p, li { white-space: pre-wrap; }</style></head><body style=" font-family:'DejaVu Sans'; font-size:9pt; font-weight:400; font-style:normal;">On Thursday 30 April 2009 11:13:33 Quim Gil wrote:<br>
> These are many items but kind of makes sense to have them, isn't it.<br>
> The question is how to check and enforce them. What can be automated and<br>
> what can be evaluated via testers feedback.<br>
><br>
> The first question is how to jump from devel to testing, which ones of<br>
> the items above (and others missing, if any) should be applied already<br>
> there. And put it in practice now in Fremantle.<br>
><br>
> What we shouldn't do is to create extras-testing or extras and let<br>
> packages jump in without the QA process in place. Taking a buggy package<br>
> out because of a new policy is going to be much more complicated.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p>I might be missing something, but how is this different from, say, what debian does at http://packages.qa.debian.org ? I don't see much point reinventing (or, in this case, re-discussing) the wheel - almost all mainstream distributions do it one way or the other. Or was the question rather how such a system/policies can be customized to fit the Maemo ecosystem ?<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p></body></html>