On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 10:06:37PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 21:33:58 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > > The picture of when exactly the mass-rebuild would happen and how > > > much the the maintainers would be involved, is way too > > > blurred. Talking about QA and lots of automated tests, we're not > > > there yet. > > > > Right, so let's not test at all then. Close our eyes and ship a > > product that has build stamps from over a period of seven months all > > over. So pray instead of test? > > "It (re)builds, let's ship it, we need not test it" is an equally > short-sighted strategy. which is not what I suggested, I explicitely said that there is more time needed to test between the freeze and the GA. > A period of seven months? Seven months without a bug report? Seven months > without the maintainer using his own package? Sounds good. So you assume all 500 packagers run a bleeding edge rawhide on a daily basis? That's far from being the case. I don't for one, do you? > > > How do a devel cycle and a test period fit into this? If we test > > > previously built packages on the road to a final product > > > > ... like for example 7 months ago, e.g. on FC6 ... > > Don't generalise. > How compatible are our distribution releases with eachother? > Why rebuild ABI-compatible components? Fedora is not known about keeping ABI compatiblity for a long time, in fact not caring about legacy is part of Fedora's definition and flexibility. > > > that we want to ship, why do we rebuild packages although nothing > > > wrong has been found with the binaries? > > > > Sure, let's ship the binaries and have the users find out. > > No testing? No QA? Is your mass-rebuild the only form of "testing"? =:-O No, not at all. But put the QA at the end of the development cycle, not spreading from FC6 to F7. > Anyway, I try to end this thread here. > > If we somehow try to prepare binaries right in time before test1 in > accordance with a clear roadmap, I'm fine with that. I still would like to > see maintainers be the ones to touch packages if they need to be touched > and not just for rebuild-fun. I think I'll start assigning all bugs that show up due to missing rebuilds to Michael. :) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpGjPxIlbOxS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
