On 01/08/2018 10:53 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> Well, if this firefox update was urgent, shouldn't it have been marked >> urgent? > > Urgency is always in the eye of the beholder. I as a user consider all > security updates "urgent", and in addition, I want ALL updates as soon as > they passed testing no matter whether they actually are urgent. You also don't want updates-testing to even exist right? > >>> I really don't understand why we do this "batched" thing to begin with. >> >> To reduce the constant flow of updates that are very minor or affect >> very few mixed in with the major updates that affect lots of people and >> are urgent. > > But the users were already able to opt to update only weekly. So why force a > fixed schedule on them? To save all the Fedora users in the world from having to update metadata for minor changes. Since there's a hourly dnf makecache every user in the world pulls down new metadata ever time we update a repo. If we update a repo for some minor enhancements it means everyone in the world has to pay for that. If we just push all those out every tuesday and don't update those unless there's something urgent we save everyone a lot of bandwith and us computing time/resources. >> To save users downloads of repodata. > > This does not work in practice because there is almost always at least one > urgent update that requires downloading the whole repodata. (And also > because maintainers are free to skip batched without giving a reason. I > always do this because I consider batching a disservice to my users.) There are definitely more days when there are no updates for a particular repo now. Of course there would be even more if you (or those who do likewise) wouldn't skip batched, but probibly we need to explain why more clearly. ...snip... >> I would be very much against additional repos like this. > > Why? It would allow you to keep the server-side batching while still > allowing those users like me to opt out of it. And the repodata download > size for fast track would be minimal if updates that went out to stable get > removed from fast track. because it would be a ton more infrastructure and resources. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
