On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 09:28 +0100, Michal Schmidt wrote: > On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:41:44 -0500 Jon Masters wrote: > > I also suggest /considering/ implementing rolling updates rather than > > pushing everything to stable. By rolling updates, in this case I mean > > implementing a technical means (and this is tricky with mirrors) by > > which not every user will receive the update at once. > please do not overload the term 'rolling updates'. That's just > confusing. Perhaps 'staggered' would convey your intended meaning > better. Agreed. Henceforth corrected because I didn't really want to go there. > If it is not possible to shorten the minimal from-Koji-to-mirrors delay > to something on the order of one hour (wouldn't that be awesome?), then > perhaps there should be a way to blacklist known brown-paper-bag > updates in the metalinks (which are not affected by the delay). I > believe this would be more useful than staggered updates. You got exactly what I meant. I also think Terry's suggestion of stability levels can easily be encoded in metadata in the yum repo, if anyone wanted to do that. Then it could dynamically change as people voted in Bodhi, and I could set a threshold of something awesomely high for applying updates, or say "wait until it's a week old first" :) Jon. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
