On 2012-09-10 16:43, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 10 September 2012 17:16, Lennart Poettering <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Mon, 10.09.12 15:51, Jesse Keating (jkeating@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
wrote:
On 09/10/2012 02:27 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
>Can't we just change the branching to a later date?
When we used to do that, we frequently had destabilizing changes
happening late in the development process, because there was no
other place to land them.
My suggestion of just letting everybody branch on their own, getting
rid
of mass branching and gettind rid of the master branch would neatly
allow people to push their changes to any later distro they want...
I don't see how that can scale to the number of packages in Fedora.
It
is going to be a combinatorics nightmare especially when a ton of
people don't work together and all have their own idea of the RIGHT
way to branch, land and build their own packages. It might work for a
scaled down OS-tree size distro.. but at 12000 packages.. and things
like "well you pushed this into X and now A..Z packages need to be
rebuilt against it."
It doesn't imply any change in policy, it just gives the packager the
choice of when to branch for Branched+1. I don't think Lennart meant to
imply that devs could choose to continue with unstable development in
Branched - just that they could 'opt out' of having a Branched+1 branch
until they actually needed one.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
