On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 04:39:37PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Thu, 2019-03-28 at 15:03 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 03:39:53PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > On Thu, 2019-03-28 at 11:29 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > We should spin up Buster to replace it too > > > > > > We've ever introduced support for unreleased operating systems in our > > > CI environment[1], and I'm not sure it would be a good idea to start > > > now... It seems to me like it would be pretty misleading. > > > > I think the fact that we've not done it in the past is a bug really, > > not really a good thing. Unless we have capacity problems, I don't > > see a good reason to avoid it, given that we already run the more > > flakey rawhide/sid distros. > > We only have Fedora Rawhide running on CentOS CI. And yes, capacity > is an ongoing concern. We're dropping 1 distro here, so we can replace it with another > Note that I would not have a problem with adding a Debian sid or > Debian testing configuration (but see capacity): what I'm against is > specifically installing Debian testing and calling it "Debian 10", > because that's just not correct. Just because it is a pre-release doesn't make it not "Debian 10". It just means it hasn't been declared fully stable yet, but that's no worse than the unstable distros IMHO. I don't see what useful benefit we gain from refusing to deploy Buster to CI until it is declared GA. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
