On 2/20/11 8:51 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
> But instead, what happens is someone builds the RPMs ... puts it in
> their blog. All their buddies download it. The build requirements are
> broken and it causes bugs. A month later, we get them logging in to the
> forums or the mailing lists or IRC with the broken packages that have
> the same EVR numbers as ours and don't get replaced by the real packages
> and it is a bad experience for everyone.
That seems very, very unlikely from people who won't use the available SL betas.
> Or, we have thousands of users with varying levels of capability, some
> of which are very knowledgeable and would produce data that helps us a
> lot. Pick a percentage of people where that data is good ... 1%, 10%,
> 20%, 30% ... the rest of the data is incorrect. How long does it take
> us to verify that the data is correct or incorrect and how does that
> compare to the time spent if we just build it and test it?
If you have a tool that can verify correctness, how can having a larger farm of
brute force builds and tests, and submissions of reproducible recipes for the
correct ones not speed things up?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com