diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005975.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005975.html | 157 |
1 files changed, 157 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005975.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005975.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..dccf06fdb --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005975.html @@ -0,0 +1,157 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Firefox 5 + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Firefox%205&In-Reply-To=%3C1308873888.22020.158.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="005973.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="005979.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Firefox 5</H1> + <B>Michael Scherer</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Firefox%205&In-Reply-To=%3C1308873888.22020.158.camel%40akroma.ephaone.org%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Firefox 5">misc at zarb.org + </A><BR> + <I>Fri Jun 24 02:04:46 CEST 2011</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005973.html">[Mageia-dev] Firefox 5 +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="005979.html">[Mageia-dev] Firefox 5 +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#5975">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#5975">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#5975">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#5975">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Le vendredi 24 juin 2011 à 01:17 +0300, Ahmad Samir a écrit : +><i> On 23 June 2011 23:48, David W. Hodgins <<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">davidwhodgins at gmail.com</A>> wrote: +</I>><i> > On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 15:52:30 -0400, Ahmad Samir <<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">ahmadsamir3891 at gmail.com</A>> +</I>><i> > wrote: +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> >> On 23 June 2011 07:58, Dexter Morgan <<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">dmorganec at gmail.com</A>> wrote: +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> >>> yes it needs to go to backports_testing before iirc +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> >> Got a link to a thread on -dev ML / irc meeting log / <insert your +</I>><i> >> favourite communication method here>, where this was decided? +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > This mailing list, thread "Release cycles proposals, and discussion", +</I>><i> > messageid BANLkTimrPR-=<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">UgQOnfvAkqPft80LNi9seQ at mail.gmail.com</A> +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > Where Anne posted ... +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> >> exactly what I had in mind. Having backports can allow choice between +</I>><i> >> "the last version of" and "the stable version with which I'm happy +</I>><i> >> with". But indeed we need more quality in backport rpms that is policy +</I>><i> >> and tests. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > In order for the qa team to perform the tests, before they go to the +</I>><i> > backports repository, they have to go to to the testing repository +</I>><i> > first. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> +</I>><i> 1) It doesn't say "we're going to use backports_testing", does it? +</I>><i> guessing != an instated policy +</I>><i> 2) IMHO, QA is too small to handle backports too +</I>><i> +</I>><i> > Something that works in cauldron may not work when moved to backports, +</I>><i> > if a dependency is missed. By using backports_testing, we can catch +</I>><i> > that before it hits the average user. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > Regards, Dave Hodgins +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Right so, the plan is: +</I>><i> - A packager submits to backports_testing and assigns to QA +</I>><i> - QA tests, the package is good to go +</I>><i> - The report is assigned to <whoever has privileges to move packages +</I>><i> from backports_testing to backports>, atm that's sysadm team +</I>><i> - Package is moved and the report closed +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Caveats: +</I>><i> - QA is too small, and it'll take time/effort to get through the +</I>><i> backported packages requiring tests, unless you depend on the user +</I>><i> asking for the backport to have tested the package properly, the user +</I>><i> will say it works if it works on his box for the arch he's using, he +</I>><i> won't do both archs, not just because he's lazy, but maybe he has one +</I>><i> Mageia box for example +</I>><i> - Sysadm team is already overworked with many other tasks, meaning the +</I>><i> packages requiring a move will rot for a while in backports_testing. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Now compare that to what's used in e.g. mdv: +</I>><i> - User asks for a backport +</I>><i> - Packager submits the backport and closes the report +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Do you see the problem I am talking about yet? adding more complexity +</I>><i> to backporting may result in less backports; the more the hoops, the +</I>><i> less the backports, the more the users' complaints about +</I>><i> I-want-the-latest-version-of-foo-yesterday. +</I> +Then we should have a way to turn complaint into productive behavior, +like "asking to people to do QA of package they request the backport +for". + +><i> The "quality of backports" is a sentence that lacks statistics and +</I>><i> numbers; in e.g. mdv, how many packages were backported to release +</I>><i> foo? how many of them worked(tm)? how many of them didn't work and +</I>><i> required a bit of fixing? how many of them didn't work and won't work +</I>><i> due to any number of reasons? +</I>><i> +</I>><i> I think backports in mdv worked pretty well all those years, not all +</I>><i> of them worked, but most of them did. +</I> +And everybody said "do not use backport, they are not supported, and +they can eat your cat if you use them". + +As said in the meeting, I wanted to send a proposal later for that, but +you shooted first, so let's start. + +Your points are valid, and I took them in account in the proposal, who +is based on previous years feedback, based on Stormi ideas mainly, and +on your points. + +So I will open 3 separate thread, to answer to the 3 questions I see : +- what process for backports +- what policy for backports +- what about updates of backports + +Using 3 mails, I hope to have a more manageable discussion that having a +big one. + +-- +Michael Scherer + +</PRE> + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005973.html">[Mageia-dev] Firefox 5 +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="005979.html">[Mageia-dev] Firefox 5 +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#5975">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#5975">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#5975">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#5975">[ 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> |