On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 12:55:30PM +0100, Vratislav Podzimek wrote: > On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 12:27 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > > > > I've been told that the F18 Anaconda work was for some time done on a > > single rawhide snapshot; after ~2 months the snapshot was updated - > > and it took weeks to get Anaconda working again against the new one. > > > > That sounds rather bad. Yes, anaconda is special, but it is not > > _that_ special; if updating for core platform changes (without any > > major known change happening in the mean time) requires weeks of work > > on anaconda, there will be other software that will require weeks of > > work to update. > I'm afraid anaconda _is that_ special. AFAICT there is no other piece of > code that directly interacts with dracut, systemd, Network Manager, gtk3 > (and GObject introspection) and many other components that change quite > often. If there is such code, I'd be happy to look at how its developers > handle such changes and take a lecture from them. > Other projects would handle something like this by having a subset of people working on a branch that kept the existing UI but was updating to fix issues with dependencies. The NewUI feature work would be done by a different subset of people on a separate branch and be merged in only when it was ready. David Cantrell has mentioned the reasons that he doesn't think that would work for anaconda -- I'll list them here so no one reads my message without that information as well: * Doing it this way would slow down anaconda development * Anaconda lacks the manpower to maintain two separate development heads -Toshio
Attachment:
pgppkGw__SnHa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
