On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:59:55 +0200 Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > What I'm reading is that all custom Fedora spins that are to be > blessed need to be composed by Release Engineering (or at least their > tools), because otherwise you (the ones that bless, build, test and > help distributing) wouldn't ever be able to reproduce whatever the > initiator of a custom spin had in mind when choosing another tool to > initially compose the spin with. Not reproduce, have confidence that what /is/ produced is the same thing that would be produced should we do it, or that what is produced will work in the same way that what we produce does. That the same codepaths are used, the only difference is configuration. > > I'm also reading that you need development for the tools that are used > to compose custom spins need to live within the Release Engineering > team or close to it, to keep up with changes in the distribution or > bugs in the compose process, but I'm not reading why we (Revisor > developers) wouldn't be capable of doing exactly that. Quite honestly because I have 0 confidence when my code paths of the day aren't used at all by your tool. I have no idea what generation of code you've copied into your tool, nor how it's being used. I have no interest in spending however long it'll take to figure all that out when at the end of the day, if the config file is sound, it should just work with Fedora's official tools. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
