Forward Rationale: To give end users (and potential devs) an opportunity
to discuss this too.
On 11-08-2010 16:29, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
Hi devs,
my last attempt for this didn't get much feedback so I try to keep it
short this time...for more details see the old thread at:
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2010-May/016770.html
This time I am just asking to give it a try. It's implementation is
trivial and if we feel it wont work out we could easily remove it later.
If there are no real objections I'd like to implement this soon; let's
say next week. Even if you don't see the benefit right now I would be
pleased to at least give it a try.
The idea can be summed up like this:
testing:
* don't break packages intentionally
* don't push incomplete rebuilds
This would definitely get me interested in Testing.
Right now my Linux knowledge is limited and thus Testing is a no-go
zone. If however I could have a guarantee that Testing offers the same
package sanity insurance of the other mirrors, I could start participating.
staging:
* a global staging repository for collaboration
its more similar to your ~/staging dir than a regular repository
* mostly meant for incomplete rebuilds
* will be excluded from mirroring (for now)
I am open for any questions or suggestions. Thanks for reading,
Pierre
It needs to be said that this is also reflection of what one should
expect to encounter in the development process in the wild. Apart from
the potential for collaboration, the idea that the Arch repos could
mimic this development cycle is very appealing to me.
__________________________
| |
V V
Development <-> Staging <-> Testing -> Release
Packaging maintenance is taken away from the end user, giving them
"safe" (it's still a beta, hence the quotes) access to Testing.
Meanwhile developers would separate packaging from Testing, considerably
giving them a lot more control over what users can access from Testing.
