Jesse Keating wrote:
On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 06:56 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
We're going to be pushing an initial set of F11 updates in the next day
or so.
Why has this not be done earlier?
Partly due to attention spent elsewhere, and partly because we'd rather
our tester base focused on the bits we're proposing for the release,
rather than the bits we're proposing to replace the release.
I am already facing a pretty nice package queue jam on my part because
F11 is frozen and hasn't received any update for some time. None of
these updates are critical nevertheless they contain bug fixes and are
prerequisites for future development.
* to prevent NEVR issues resulting from F-9, F-10 and F-12 being open,
while F-11 is frozen.
Won't help at all, as the F11 release repo doesn't change, nor do the
contents of the DVD, so F9/10 will always move ahead of the release.
You are missing the point: F11 updates would be open NOW!
Which doesn't help the DVD at all.
Pardon, but composing the DVD is solely YOUR problem, YOU need to find a
solution for.
F11 GA development would be decoupled from F11 updates!
Which doesn't help the situation where F10 updates will quickly grow NVR
higher than the F11 release.
rel-eng would cherry-pick the packages they want to put on CD/DVD, while
F11 updates would move on and would already carry what otherwise would
hit GA after "release".
releng is a terrible place to "cherry pick". We can't watch each and
every build and decide what is good and what is bad to have in the
release. We have to rely on the informed maintainer proposing a package
break the freeze and be brought into the release.
... the informed "maintainers" did "submit packages through koji/bodhi" ...
* rawhide/testing would also help wrt. test rawhide for
experimental/unsafe stuff, which would help improving stability when
rel-eng brands a rawhide snapshot "Fedora release".
So you want a rawhide, and a rawerhide?
Neither, all I am saying is that your work flow _is not designed to help
stability_, but encourages prematurely shipping broken/untested "crap
stuff".
That's only if maintainers don't actually take the schedule and
development effort into consideration, completely ignoring the cycle and
only having "crap" packages in rawhide at the time of the freeze. If
they actually used good development practices, the packages in rawhide
at the time of the freeze would not be "crap", they would be the
packages they want in the release, and any changes would be to fix
unexpected bugs in those packages.
This consideration shows, when packages are being added to rawhide or
undergo substanticial changes, right before your freeze.
And how is this releng fault, when the maintainers are just plain not
following good development practices?
Quite simple: Your schedules and practices are widely irrelevant to
contributors.
It's you who needs to synchronize your job with what contributors,
upstreams and the rest of the worlds provides to you. It's naive of you
to expect the rest of the world to synchronize with you!
You end up with untested/likely broken packages in your release and
with Fedora releases which are not much more than "rawhide snapshots",
and CD/DVDs which aren't worth using.
Untested... that's why we compose rawhide from the frozen bits, rawhide
that is used by large numbers of people who are testing the software in
their every day use... That's why we find and fix numerous bugs that
improve the release. That's why good maintainers slow down their
changes prior to the freeze to lessen the risk and to increase the
chance that the release has good quality packages.
Well, F11-Preview spoke a different language.
Even elementary key features were/are simply plain "unusable" and didn't
even survive basic test.
Examples: anaconda, preupgrade, dbus, ...
There would be one major difference: rel-eng, would have to herry-pick
and move around packages between F11 GA and F11/updates before the release.
We already do that based on maintainers and testers who propose and test
packages during freezes.
As having been said many times before: You can't and will never be able
to so - You are cheating to yourselves, all you can do is to test for
very few, very isolated issues, on packages you are familiar with.
Perhaps you're just not willing to use good development practices,
Rubbish - Perhaps your development practices are far from being "good"?
Perhaps you're too close to be able to comprehend this? Perhaps your ego
is in your way to comprehend?
and
are trying to find a reason to blame our development cycle when this
doesn't work out for you. I can't help but not agree with you.
No, I want you to understand that there are other demands but yours and
that your are better off taking them into account.
Ralf
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
