* these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected
package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes
the problem.
[Where problems could occur]
* Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is
wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up?
* It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before
upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important
to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the
event of a regression.
* This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why
your upload is low risk.
* This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered,
and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU.
[Other Info]
* Anything else you think is useful to include
* Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board
* and address these questions in advance
[Impact]
* Currently
[Test Case]
* detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug
* these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected
package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes
the problem.
[Where problems could occur]
* Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is
wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up?
* It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before
upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important
to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the
event of a regression.
* This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why
your upload is low risk.
* This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered,
and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU.
[Other Info]
* Anything else you think is useful to include
* Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board
* and address these questions in advance