On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
>
> Just wanted to add my +1 and this is as good place as any other.
>
+1
--
Ismael Olea
http://olea.org/diario/
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> The impression I got (which might be wrong), is that it was expected that
> people would test specific packages from rawhide and not be expected to
> be running it all at once.
That just doesn't work. The network of dependencies and reverse dependencies
generally ends up
On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 21:15 +, Colin Walters wrote:
> Oh, I didn't realize there would be a distinction between "built in
> koji" and "rawhide" now. If that's the case, than this sounds fine to
> me! The point is basically that we need some sort of stable, defined
> baseline for what you get
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> AutoQA will be running at some point, and it can be doing the
> qa /before/ things get tagged for rawhide,
Oh, I didn't realize there would be a distinction between "built in
koji" and "rawhide" now. If that's the case, than this sounds f
On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 20:56 +, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> >
> > Rawhide as we know it, /pub/fedora/linux/releases/development/ will
> > remain "rawhide". We may even change the path to say rawhide, just to
> > catch things up and well I like
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> Rawhide as we know it, /pub/fedora/linux/releases/development/ will
> remain "rawhide". We may even change the path to say rawhide, just to
> catch things up and well I like keeping mirrors on their toes. Rawhide
> will be a repository of
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:20:13 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> I wonder where your confusion comes from. With this rewording of the
> proposal, the proposal doesn't change. []
> So you can continue to run rawhide all you want. Your entry point to
> rawhide may change slightly, you may have to star
Dne 23.10.2009 02:18, Adam Miller napsal(a):
> I think this is an awesome idea, and yes I think this "version" of the
> verbage is more clear. Kudos to Jesse (and all those involved in the
> development of the idea of the "split rawhide") and I hope to see this
> come to fruition.
Just wanted to a
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 14:18:23 -0700,
Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> Two, it makes testing things a bit more complex. Those of us who like to
> test upcoming stuff in real use - i.e. on our main machines - will have
> to choose whether to test "rawhide", in which case we'll have more pain
> to de
I would also like to jump on the help train if there is anything I am able
to lend a hand with.
-Adam (From Android)
On Oct 22, 2009 9:05 PM, "Mike McGrath" wrote:
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009, Adam Miller wrote: > I think this is an awesome idea,
and yes I think this "ve...
I agree, how can I help?
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009, Adam Miller wrote:
> I think this is an awesome idea, and yes I think this "version" of the
> verbage is more clear. Kudos to Jesse (and all those involved in the
> development of the idea of the "split rawhide") and I hope to see this
> come to fruition.
>
I agree, how can I
I think this is an awesome idea, and yes I think this "version" of the
verbage is more clear. Kudos to Jesse (and all those involved in the
development of the idea of the "split rawhide") and I hope to see this
come to fruition.
-Adam
--
http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
---
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 14:18 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> I have two particular nits with it. One, it's pretty unwieldy,
> especially for part time maintainers (thinking how many hoops we'll have
> to jump through just to keep our packages up to date). Having to jump
> through the Bodhi hoops
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:02:42 -0700,
Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> Yes, but it may happen before the bodhi stage, when we get autoqa
> working on post-build tests. This kind of check could happen at SCM
> commit time, package build time, or finally bodhi push time. Seems
> reasonable that we'd
Le Jeu 22 octobre 2009 23:20, Jesse Keating a écrit :
> So you can continue to run rawhide all you want. Your entry point to
> rawhide may change slightly, you may have to start with the current
> Fedora release or the current testing release for the next Fedora, and
> then upgrade to the rawhi
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 14:47 -0600, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:50:54 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> > Hi all. It has been brought to my attention that my description of my
> > future vision of rawhide as explained here is much clearer than previous
> > attempts (including the c
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 09:50 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Hi all. It has been brought to my attention that my description of my
> future vision of rawhide as explained here is much clearer than previous
> attempts (including the current "no frozen rawhide" wiki page). So I
> felt it prudent to fo
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:50:54 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Hi all. It has been brought to my attention that my description of my
> future vision of rawhide as explained here is much clearer than previous
> attempts (including the current "no frozen rawhide" wiki page). []
Actually, the "no froz
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 11:33 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>
> Good point. SCM commit time (or tag time) with a CVS hook would be
> awesome as long as the hook was fast enough.
Note, I didn't say "CVS", I said "SCM" (:
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 13:39 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Tomas Mraz wrote:
>
>
> > We could allow adding numbers after the dist tag in release for this
> > purpose.
>
> That is already allowed, and encouraged, for branch-specific modfications,
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuide
Tomas Mraz wrote:
> We could allow adding numbers after the dist tag in release for this
> purpose.
That is already allowed, and encouraged, for branch-specific modfications,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Minor_release_bumps_for_old_branches
-- Rex
--
fedora-devel
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 11:02 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 10:55 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > So to make this a reality, we need to ensure that whatever is in rawhide
> > has a *>=* ENVR than anything in the other trees. So I assume that when
> > submitting a bodhi update, b
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 11:02 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 10:55 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > So to make this a reality, we need to ensure that whatever is in rawhide
> > has a *>=* ENVR than anything in the other trees. So I assume that when
> > submitting a bodhi update,
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 10:55 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> So to make this a reality, we need to ensure that whatever is in rawhide
> has a *>=* ENVR than anything in the other trees. So I assume that when
> submitting a bodhi update, bodhi would check rawhide and ensure that
> whatever you were abo
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 09:50 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Hi all. It has been brought to my attention that my description of my
> future vision of rawhide as explained here is much clearer than previous
> attempts (including the current "no frozen rawhide" wiki page). So I
> felt it prudent to fo
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 09:50 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> This is my vision on how to accomplish both a always active development
> stream, and a more stable pending release stream, keeping everybody
> happy. Want to help? I'll be at FUDCon Toronto discussing roadblocks
> to this vision and disc
Hi all. It has been brought to my attention that my description of my
future vision of rawhide as explained here is much clearer than previous
attempts (including the current "no frozen rawhide" wiki page). So I
felt it prudent to forward it along to the devel list for more eyes to
look upon it a
27 matches
Mail list logo
