From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008506.html | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008506.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008506.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008506.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008506.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e97f74650 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-September/008506.html @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] Opening backports (was Re: [Mageia-sysadm] Using SQL database for youri) + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] Opening backports (was Re: [Mageia-sysadm] Using SQL database for youri)

+ Florian Hubold + doktor5000 at arcor.de +
+ Thu Sep 29 20:55:43 CEST 2011 +

+
+ +
Am 29.09.2011 14:13, schrieb Olav Vitters:
+> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:24:56AM +0200, Samuel Verschelde wrote:
+>> backports_testing, but it means that we would lose the current checking that 
+>> updates come from the 1/updates branch)
+> Long term I prefer more checks because I do make mistakes. But maybe lax
+> as a temporary ("a few weeks") solution until it uses the SQL database?
+Well, is it really that necessary for a matter of some weeks to speed up
+backports opening? Shouldn't we care first that sustainability of Mageia
+is ensured first?
+
+It's not like backports candidates will lessen workload on QA, rather the opposite.
+That's my personal opinion.
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1