Matthew Miller wrote:
> Overall, it's a more predictable workload, which *is* a good idea, for
> both volunteer and otherwise.
No, sorry, but as volunteers, we have other commitments which mean we cannot
always do our Fedora work when some central Fedora schedule dictates it. The
mad rushes at release time are already bad enough, adding ones for update
batches every month is VERY unhelpful. The schedule will inevitably conflict
with real life. The current flexible approach is much better suited for
volunteer developers, allowing us to schedule our work on updates when WE
have time.
And for what is worth, the current approach is also more flexible for our
users, for similar reasons. Not to mention that there are users like me who
WANT as frequent updates as possible. (I'd personally like instant or hourly
pushes, or at least consistent daily pushes (independently of whether it's a
business day etc.).) But even those users who want to update only once a
month will want to do it on THEIR schedule, not on the Fedora project's.
> It's also more effective to QA packages in sets, and more effective can
> mean more efficient.
How is it more effective to QA a huge batch of totally unrelated changes
which may or may not have interactions as opposed to QAing small isolated
changes individually? This just does not make any sense whatsoever.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
