Per Iain's (and others) proposition, we've made a small tweak to the
SRU process in order to help everybody produce SRU bugs that can be
accepted with more confidence.
= What is the problem? =
The "Regression Potential" section is often used as a space for
developers to argue why their upload is risk free, and should be
accepted. The intention of the section, however, is for developers to
demonstrate that they have thought "what could go wrong with this
update?"
Too often, we're seeing "None" or "Low" as a Regression Potential. In
these cases, we will already go back to the uploader asking for them
to replace this with an analysis of the *potential* places where
regressions could occur.
= What is the proposed solution? =
The actual change is that we are updating the template to rename this
section to "Where problems could occur". We think this is a more clear
title that will guide all developers as to the expectations for what
should be written here.
We've also written some small updates to the StableReleaseUpdates wiki
page which hopefully make this a bit clearer.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Procedure
= Will you reject my uploads if I still write "Regression Potential"? =
No. If the contents of the bug report contain all of the information
required, we don't mind what the sections are called. As said, we have
renamed the section only to make it more clear of what we expect to
see written there.
= But there's no actual change in the requirements, this is just a
change of wording. =
That is correct.
On behalf of the Ubuntu SRU team,
--
Łukasz 'sil2100' Zemczak
Foundations Team
lukasz.zemczak@canonical.com
www.canonical.com
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
