Re: [gentoo-dev] stabilizing libraries without testing reverse deps

On 10/1/13 2:12 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> So if you're relying on the presence of filed bugs to give some sort of
> coverage metric, you're going to be out of luck from time to time. For
> instance, that fun bug where stabilising a version of libraw broke the
> things depending upon it that were already stable.

That's why arch testers and arch developers are expected to test reverse
dependencies.

Even then, no amount of testing guarantees lack of problems.

Paweł