On 11 October 2017 at 15:08, Martin Stransky <stransky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/11/2017 07:26 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Heiko Adams <ml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> Am Mittwoch, den 11.10.2017, 07:53 -0700 schrieb Gerald B. Cox: >>> >>> By definition BETA software is never intended to be pushed to stable. Fx >>> 57 is BETA. When the STABLE version is released, then it can go into >>> updates-testing. Not before. Again, that is the purpose of RAWHIDE. >>> >>> Does this mean it's also not allowed to push packaged git-snapshots of a >>> software to updates-testing because they are unreleased and potentially >>> unstable? >>> >> >> As Adam mentioned apparently this isn't the "Official Policy". >> >> My opinion however is common sense dictates that you don't put anything in >> updates-testing unless you intend to push that software to stable. If you >> want people to test out experimental software, put it in RAWHIDE. If it's >> a git-snapshot and your INTENT is to push it to stable (for example, >> you're >> fixing a bug) then that is OK for updates-testing. >> >> In this instance, there is no intent to push Fx 57 BETA to stable. That's >> why it does't belong in update-testing. > > > I think there's a bit misunderstanding here. Some parts of the FF57 update > are going to be in stable as is (if the testing goes well). That includes > the CSD patch [1]. > There are several misunderstandings here but they all stem from a core problem which an old Mozilla quote covers: Surprise is the opposite of engagement. [1] It is something we forget a lot.. but is a reason why older maintainers of XYZ software (Mozilla, X11, gcc, kernel, etc) would make sure that a heads up email about a major version change goes out. If you put out a heads up that "tomorrow I will be pushing Firefox 57BETA into updates-testing" you could have given people heads up and would have also learned from someone that updates-testing is on for everyone in the post-branch world. While in this case it probably would not have affected your decision, in other cases it might have made it clearer that you needed to do so after a different time. It would have also queued in people to either skip updates or know why their workflow died. In either case, people would be better informed. [1] https://opensource.com/business/10/3/five-questions-about-building-community-chris-blizzard-mozilla -- Stephen J Smoogen. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
