diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005976.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005976.html | 126 |
1 files changed, 126 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005976.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005976.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..932e3c0c3 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005976.html @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Proposal%20of%20a%20backporting%20process&In-Reply-To=%3C1308874196.22020.163.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="005974.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="005980.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process</H1> + <B>Michael Scherer</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Proposal%20of%20a%20backporting%20process&In-Reply-To=%3C1308874196.22020.163.camel%40akroma.ephaone.org%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process">misc at zarb.org + </A><BR> + <I>Fri Jun 24 02:09:55 CEST 2011</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005974.html">[Mageia-dev] Blowfish bug +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="005980.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#5976">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#5976">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#5976">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#5976">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Hi, + +as said in the thread of firefox 5, and in the meeting of packager +sooner this week, this is the first mail about backports ( on 3 ). + +So here is the proposal of a process, based on the feedback of people, +and the idea of some packagers ( mainly stormi ). + + +- Someone request a backport ( by bugzilla, by madb, by a email, by +taking a packager family in hostage, whatever ). I would prefer use +bugzilla but this may not be very user friendly, or too heavy. + +- a packager decide to do it. Based on the policy ( outlined in another +mail ), and maybe seeing with the maintainer first about that for non +trivial applications, the backport can be done, or not. The criterias +for being backported or not are not important to the process, just +assume that they exist for now ( and look at next mail ). So based on +criteria, someone say "it can be backported, so I do it". + +- I am not sure on this part, but basically, we have 2 choices : + - the packager take the cauldron package and push to backport testing + - the packager move the cauldron package in svn to backport, and there +send it to backport testing. + +Proposal 1 mean less work duplication, but proposal 2 let us do more +customization. + +if the package doesn't build, the packager fix ( or drop the idea if +this requires too much work ) + +- the packager send requesting feedback about the backport from the +people who requested it, and test it as well. + +- based on feedback ( ie if the package work or if the packager is +confident ), the packager decide to move it to backport for everybody, +using some stuff similar to rpmctl ( the tool we used to move package at +Mandriva ). The tool would also send notifications. + +- if the package doesn't work, he either fix, or drop the backport idea. +If he fix, we go back on testing, if he drop, we remove the rpm ( with a +automated cleaning of rpm after 1 or 2 months ). + +If the packager drop the backport, it should be notified to the +requester ( hence the use of bugzilla, or a more suitable tool ) + +This way : +- packages are not sent untested, thus raising confidence in backports +- the QA should not be overloaded, and can focus on updates +- sysadmins are not overloaded +- people requesting backport see how QA work, and are involved into the +distribution as testers, thus creating a much healthier discussion with +packagers, and creating more incentive to help. And since they request +the package, they will be motivated to test more than stuff they do not +use. + +WDYT ? + +-- +Michael Scherer + +</PRE> + + + + + + + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005974.html">[Mageia-dev] Blowfish bug +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="005980.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#5976">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#5976">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#5976">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#5976">[ 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> |