On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
> At the risk of complicating the world would it make any sense for us to
> have (in increasing order of importance)
>
> updates-testing
> updates
> updates-important
>
> packages that are security or critical go from updates-testing to
> updates-important - and that happens as necessary
>
> all other updates go from updates-testing to updates once a month.
And what problem would that solve? All I see is it causes problems for those
people who need the updates you don't judge "important".
And stages non-critical/important updates so our QA team can test and
check them over more thoroughly and align testing goals and days to help
foster and create a more active and involved testing infrastructure.
This is what we HAVE to do.
-sv