diff options
| author | Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mageia.org> | 2013-04-14 13:46:12 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mageia.org> | 2013-04-14 13:46:12 +0000 |
| commit | 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 (patch) | |
| tree | b175f9d5fcb107576dabc768e7bd04d4a3e491a0 /zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001503.html | |
| parent | fa5098cf210b23ab4f419913e28af7b1b07dafb2 (diff) | |
| download | archives-master.tar archives-master.tar.gz archives-master.tar.bz2 archives-master.tar.xz archives-master.zip | |
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001503.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001503.html | 154 |
1 files changed, 154 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001503.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001503.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..dff155cea --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/20101129/001503.html @@ -0,0 +1,154 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Mirror%20layout%2C%20round%20two&In-Reply-To=%3C1291038980.8266.102.camel%40akroma.ephaone.org%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="001497.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="001506.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two</H1> + <B>Michael Scherer</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Mirror%20layout%2C%20round%20two&In-Reply-To=%3C1291038980.8266.102.camel%40akroma.ephaone.org%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two">misc at zarb.org + </A><BR> + <I>Mon Nov 29 14:56:20 CET 2010</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="001497.html">[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="001506.html">[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#1503">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#1503">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#1503">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#1503">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Le lundi 29 novembre 2010 à 13:14 +0100, Samuel Verschelde a écrit : +><i> +</I>><i> It was said early that you just have to look at whether the package +</I>><i> has a maintainer or not to make a distinction, but this is not sufficient. +</I>><i> A maintainer can be very active in cauldron but not care about maintaining +</I>><i> for stable releases. A package can have no maintainer but be actively +</I>><i> supported in practice (by everybody in cauldron, by security team in +</I>><i> stable releases). +</I>><i> +</I>><i> The current main vs contrib approach in mandriva is very sensible. It has some (minor, to me) +</I>><i> drawbacks, but when I install packages from main I *know* there will be security updates, +</I>><i> bugfix updates, and a QA process that packages in contrib don't have. +</I> +Since we pull lots of deps ( like perl module, python module ) to ensure +that everything build fine without any formal check of packages, I can +ensure you that packages in main do not have more QA process than +anything. + +What is checked is a list of functionality in the default installation. +Not every possible feature using every possible package in main. + + +Almost all community distros have found that what you call "minor" +drawbacks are in fact not a good idea. Fedora merged core and extras. +Debian never did the split, Gentoo either. The split is usually just a +reminiscence of the commercial nature of the main sponsor ( Mandriva, +Ubuntu ). + +Let me remind the problems that we are having with the split, as they +are not so minor : +- complexity on build system side to take in account this + - packagers time lost to understand what going on when self + containment is broken. Older ones do not have the problem ( or at + least, know it ), but newer one sooner or later does. + +- complexity on the users system as they need to have twice the number + of media to cope with this. This also appear in the interface of + various tools, and it is imho uneeded. Most people will say that we + already have too much medias. + +- complexity because users do not understand it. If we tell + +- time lost managing it. moving from contribs to main, and cleaning + main. Main cleaning that is seldomly done because : + - no one has time to do it + - people fiercly defend the inclusion of their favorite software in + main + +- time lost because packagers have to wait on overloaded sysadmin to do + the move + +- complexity over time of support because package move from main to + contribs and viceversa. Especially when there is some backports from + a software in main that would requires a software in contribs, etc. + + + +><i> Do we plan to have no QA process at all in Mageia ? +</I> +You should not use this kind of formulation, this is FUD. + +><i> If we plan to have such processes, does the merge between core and extra +</I>><i> make is efficient ? I guess we don't plan to have all packages (even +</I>><i> maintained ones) equally supported with a full QA process (doesn't seem realistic) ? +</I> +Again, reread the mail I sent. This is a user concern, not a mirror +admin concern. As such, it should not leak on mirror organisation, +neither on BS organisation. +And the filtering proposal I made could perfectly fit, provided we find +a way to get the "QA note" for a package. Maybe a webapp, with + +If some users only want to have only "QA approved package", that's +rather easy. Just install nothing outside of the default set of +packages. + +><i> Packages in core get the "QA approved" stamp whereas packages in extra get none. +</I> +The self containment requirement would make it very hard to get such QA +approved stamp. + +We cannot have a package being tested without doing the same for its +requires first. And we cannot say that we support a package without +supporting the full requires. + +Look at openoffice at Mandriva. It does requires +tomcat5-servlet-2.4-api, hsqldb on 2010.1 . They are both non trivial to +test, and I am quite sure that they were not much "QA approved" besides +"openoffice work for basic tasks". And in fact, when eclipse was in +main, this was the same. + +So in order to have openoffice to have a QA approved stamp, openjdk, +tomcat and hsqldb would have one. I am pretty sure they do not had +extensive checks.. + +-- +Michael Scherer + +</PRE> + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="001497.html">[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="001506.html">[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#1503">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#1503">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#1503">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#1503">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + +<hr> +<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list</a><br> +</body></html> |