On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 14:38 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > 1. Increase participation in Rawhide: it provides a huge benefit in > terms of identifying issues and having them fixed quickly and early in > the cycle. Agreed - rawhide has a bad rep, and lots of people tend to avoid it. It has been improving lately, but we should keep trying out new things to get it to the stage that anyone involved in Fedora development should be able to run rawhide. Here's a snippet from an old email on time based release processes that still really resonates with me when thinking about rawhide: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-hackers/2002-June/msg00041.html The goal of the unstable branch is to be an exciting and forward-moving but USABLE BY TESTERS piece of software. This is just the "release early, release often" principle. ... The unstable branch must always be dogfood-quality. If testers can't test it by using it daily, they can't make the jump. If the unstable branch becomes too unstable, we can't release it on a reliable schedule, so we have to start breaking the stable branch as a stopgap. Here's a suggestion: 1) Come up with a rough definition of what it means for rawhide to be considered "dogfoodable" - e.g. installs, boots, networking works, desktop and core apps usable, etc. etc. 2) Create a RawhideBlocker tracker bug - add anything to it that breaks something on the dogfoodable list 3) Post details to fedora-devel-list of any new bug added to RawhideBlocker, cc-ing the package owners 4) Harass package owners, and encourage others to help, until the issue is resolved 5) Keep the list small, so that "OMG, it's blocking rawhide" is a real incentive for people to sort problems out. If the list grows too long, consider lowering the dogfoodable bar. Cheers, Mark. -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
