On 09.04.2007 22:57, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 08:49:48PM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >> Le lundi 09 avril 2007 à 13:18 -0400, Jesse Keating a écrit : >>> On Monday 09 April 2007 13:13:25 Christopher Stone wrote: >>>> Checking to see if a package still builds correctly is more important >>>> than a little extra processing time during upgrades. I'm pretty sure >>>> people expect full upgrades to take a bit of time. >>>> Just my opinoin. >>> What you fail to realize is that you can accomplish checking to see if things >>> build correctly without making those builds go to everybody in the universe >>> as an update. These things are not tied together. >> But you can't accomplish checking the maintainer did check the package >> builds and works with the rest of a release if you allow old release >> packages >> Sorry, but "it builds" is not a good check. Especially if no human ever >> runs the result > I agree with Nicolas, at least one test release should be used to > rebuild everything in rawhide and have thus the result tested. I kind of agree with you two that testing the freshly build packages would be best. But *I* think not rebuilding everything when there is no need to is more important, because - the existing packages are out in the wild and we know that those work well - we seem to have users in countries were internet bandwidth seems to be costly and unreliable. We make it a lot easier for those people if we don't force them to download and update new packages that were rebuild without real improvements The compromise that IMHO should makes both sides happy: we have mass-rebuilds quite often anyway (probably every two or three releases due to toolchain changes; e.g. once a year). We rebuild and test everything then in any case anyway and that IMHO should be sufficient -- so lets skip releases like F7. CU thl -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
