Le dimanche 03 juin 2007 à 10:40 +0200, Patrice Dumas a écrit : > The > point is that in discussions many of the infrastructures team people > showed that they wanted to add mandatory processes even when packagers > wanted shortcuts, missing a some before packagers there > they wanted some defaults that didn't correspond to > some packagers will. Once again it is not about the work done but about > some directions. In general these are not technical points but more > 'political' ones. For an example (if it is still unclear) I think > freezes for releases are good, and it is very nice to have an > infrastructure for that. My personal opinion there (and I do not claim to represent anything more than myself) is former Extras was very good at some things, and former Core at others, and it's logical that merged processes and tools take the best of each. Extras was good at specifying packaging policy & had good build tools to enforce it → koji is heavily inspired by the Extras buildsys Core was good at release engineering, and Extras never managed to create anything approaching → release engineering tools and processes mostly follow Core rules > However I think that instead of asking to a > rel-eng to tag the build to enter the freeze, it should be up to the > packager, with a possibility for rel-engs to deny it. I suspect you've never tried to herd cats. Making this the rule instead of the exception like now wouldn't work because of human nature, there's always people who think they know better and would waste rel-eng time just when it's needed elsewhere. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
