On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 12:54 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > > Could there be a way to throw everything in the same repo and give the > user/installer a choice of how 'well-tested' something should be before > installing it? Preferably with a sliding scale instead of just 2 > choices. Normally on new installs and machines used explicitly for > testing I'd expect people to want the latest changes but become more > conservative on machines that are working well and used for important > work. The 'well-tested' concept might have factors for age, feedback, > emergency overrides, etc. Take your sliding scale and multiply the various configurations that have to be generated/tested by each stop on the scale. Lets say for instance that we want to do a new xulrunner, very raw. Every xulrunner dependent app will have to be built for that version and included. Then what if we want to do a new yelp that is pretty well tested, but not perfect. Now we have to build one for the well tested scale stop, and keep the other one (what nvrs to use now?!) at the untested slot. Oh for fun, lets throw in something else that yelp depends on, but is not in the xulrunner set, that is very well tested and stable. Now you've got a yelp for the very well tested stop, a yelp for the medium stop, a yelp with tons of other stuff at the raw stop for xulrunner. What NVRs to apply to these, how many different ways can we assemble packages to test for cohesive deps and upgrade paths, and how to create a updates system that takes all this into consideration when poor fred just wants to update his package? -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
