On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 03:54:33PM +0100, Björn Persson wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > build finishes for f19, lands in a f19-pending > > autoqa runs on the package, if it passes, tag it in to f19 > > if it doesn't, mail maintainer/etc about it. > > If there's some compelling reason it has to land, the maintainer can > > override and tag into f19 directly. (and then explain themselves :) > > I'm sure the override would happen with every GCC upgrade. The > soname of Libgnat changes with every GCC release, so all the Ada > packages have to be rebuilt in dependency order. It's normally just a > rebuild with no bugfixing, but since it has to be manually started and > monitored it will always take some time. I imagine that quite a few > people would be annoyed if GCC would be delayed while we rebuild the > Ada packages. IMHO this kind of focus is why rawhide is in the state it is today. Minimising work for package maintainers, at the cost of making rawhide unusable for people who ought to be able to test it. As long as we have that mindset rawhide will continue to eat babies and kill your ponies. Delaying a new package while we fix broken deps by rebuilding things that were broken is a *good* thing - provided we have a means to ensure the downstream rebuilds can be performed without being delayed by non-responsive maintainers. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
