From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005900.html | 134 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 134 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005900.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005900.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005900.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005900.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9ac8d033a --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005900.html @@ -0,0 +1,134 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] Updates process is now available + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] Updates process is now available

+ Michael Scherer + misc at zarb.org +
+ Wed Jun 22 00:23:32 CEST 2011 +

+
+ +
Le mardi 21 juin 2011 à 18:57 +0200, Damien Lallement a écrit :
+> Hello all,
+> 
+> security, qa and sysadmin team worked on the qa/updates process to 
+> provide updates as soon as possible.
+> All is now ready (boklm is finalizing a scrip to move updates from 
+> "testing" to "updates"). This script will be uses by security team 
+> members and a few QA people to push updates.
+> 
+> You can now read:
+> - http://www.mageia.org/wiki/doku.php?id=updates_policy
+> - http://www.mageia.org/wiki/doku.php?id=qa_updates
+
+I have some questions about the page 
+http://www.mageia.org/wiki/doku.php?id=qa_updates
+
+"It's a new package fixing a bug (security or not) or adding a missing
+feature."
+
+Adding a missing feature is not part of a update as we defined it so
+this part seems strange to me, could this one be clarified ?
+
+
+"Don't forget to enable the i586 medias on x86_64 systems" 
+
+I do not understand why is should be needed ( except for nspluginwrapper
+). Is there something to watch for when doing this ?
+
+"Write an validation message"
+
+I do not understand what is the validation message about, could we
+clarify the goal of the message, or add a example ? 
+
+"Rewrite the advisory for the secteam (ask the developper to provide the
+advisory if missing)"
+
+IIRC, the advisory should have been provided by the packager ( according
+to the others page ), so why rewrite it ? Isn't it a left over ?
+Unless what it mean "check that the packager said something that normal
+people will understand" ? 
+Also, on the page, "developer", is "upstream developer", or "packager
+who take care of the update" ?
+
+
+-- 
+Michael Scherer
+
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1