Re: Let's revisit the FTBFS policy

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 14. 08. 19 14:55, Vít Ondruch wrote:
I think it would be probably enough to stop here. Orphaned packages gets
garbage collected ATM. The step 4 was a bit unexpected for packages with
bugs in ASSIGNED state especially.

If we stop here, the current "setting to ASSIGNED to stop this" remains a problem.

Also the timing with mass rebuild and shifting packages from Rawhide to
F31 is unfortunate. I saw a lot of packages, which were reported as
FTBFS in BZ, then they were retired but later the bugs were moved from
Rawhide to F31, that was strange.

IMHO we should probably do this after branching and in rawhide only, to avoid breakage few weeks before the beta freeze.

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux