2016-06-30 17:59 GMT+02:00 luca pedrielli <[email protected]>:
> Il 30/06/2016 17:04, Jean-Claude Vanier ha scritto: > > Two questions: > -- currently we have 4 repositories; this number will increase for > each new release, according to the current model; > the proposed changes will keep 4 repositories forever, as there > will not be "new" release. So, at start, the benefit, in terms of > space required, is not that important. > Is that correct? > > -- imagine we are, let's say ten years in the future: > "Legacy" (=2013) is still the same? > "LTS" evolves "slowly" and still features kde4? > "Stable" features "plasmic13" (the evolution of kde project in ten years) > "Cooker" is still cooking > > I guess there will be a kind of shift and old releases will have to > be abandoned and we should adopt, from the beginning, a rule for that. > > > +1 > > The proposal of TPG is interesting. > > I do not find great difficulty for the ordinary work of everyday. > but what happens in the case of big technical news ?: > > kde4-> plasma, python2-> python3, gcc-> clang are only some news present > in 3.0 > > how can news like these "rolling" in stable easily? > > > This is a bow for QA team :) Till QA tests won't say that new feature won't break system, then it can not be published. Idea is to have as much automatic tests as it is possbile. Ofcourse this means effort but in time perspective there is chance to have thing working with less human input. For example: LTS with python2 is about to be updated with python3. This means python3 can be pushed for LTS repository same time when all dependent packages to python3 were builded for LTS, and without problems can replace old python2 packages and related rpms.
_______________________________________________ OM-Cooker mailing list [email protected] http://ml.openmandriva.org/mailman/listinfo/om-cooker_ml.openmandriva.org
