Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 22:38:30 +0100, > Lennart Poettering <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I'd propose instead that mass branching goes away entirely, and the >> "master" branch too. > This is kind of how things work now at a repo level. There are a couple of > problems though. Sometimes the changes have ripple effects and other packages > also need to get rebuilt for rawhide. The other is that fixes in > updates-testing aren't inherited into rawhide. During freezes this can leave > rawhide broken for a long time. There's a pretty fundamental reason why Lennart's proposal doesn't work: even if a given package is source-wise identical between F-n and F-n+1, that doesn't mean it would be binary-identical. Either the packages it depends on or the build toolchain might well have changed since F-n was split off. IMO, maintainers who abdicate their responsibility to rebuild in rawhide are being unhelpful to the rest of the project, first by possibly supplying incompatible old packages and second by not exercising the rawhide build environment. Is it really so painful to launch an extra "fedpkg build" in the master branch? If you're keeping master and the newest release branch in exact sync, it's surely trivial to script something that will duplicate your commits in one branch into the other and then launch the extra build. Fire-and-forget once a day or whatever, and everyone's happy. (Of course, if the rebuild in master fails, then you have more work to do ... but it's work you'd have had to face up to soon anyway.) regards, tom lane -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
