Re: [csw-maintainers] Integrating unstable→testing — handover

2013-09-08 Thread Matchek
2013/9/8 Peter FELECAN : > Adding this information helps. The date of the deletion also to keep the > "certain time". Of course, the flag can be negated if the package is > re-instantiated. Yes. The problem is that this will require a database schema change and code changes in multiple places. >

Re: [csw-maintainers] Integrating unstable→testing ― handover

2013-09-08 Thread Peter FELECAN
"Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński" writes: > 2013/9/7 Laurent Blume >> >> On 2013-09-07 8:29 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński wrote: >> > So far, I've tried to make the package promotion as simple as >> > possible. Ideally, it was an equivalent of taking a snapshot of >> > unstable and making it the tes

Re: [csw-maintainers] Integrating unstable→testing ― handover

2013-09-08 Thread Peter FELECAN
"Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński" writes: > 2013/9/7 Peter FELECAN >> IMHO, we need to find somebody to implement the automatic transition >> from unstable to testing. Remember, we decided that the transition is >> made when there is no blocking issue reported in our BTS after 2 weeks >> from release

Re: [csw-maintainers] Integrating unstable→testing ― handover

2013-09-07 Thread Matchek
2013/9/7 Laurent Blume > > On 2013-09-07 8:29 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński wrote: > > So far, I've tried to make the package promotion as simple as > > possible. Ideally, it was an equivalent of taking a snapshot of > > unstable and making it the testing catalog. > > Since that's basically what

Re: [csw-maintainers] Integrating unstable→testing ― handover

2013-09-07 Thread Laurent Blume
On 2013-09-07 8:29 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński wrote: > So far, I've tried to make the package promotion as simple as > possible. Ideally, it was an equivalent of taking a snapshot of > unstable and making it the testing catalog. Since that's basically what I'm doing in production, I'm all for

Re: [csw-maintainers] Integrating unstable→testing ― handover

2013-09-07 Thread Matchek
2013/9/7 Peter FELECAN > IMHO, we need to find somebody to implement the automatic transition > from unstable to testing. Remember, we decided that the transition is > made when there is no blocking issue reported in our BTS after 2 weeks > from release time. Right. We might start moving in this

Re: [csw-maintainers] Integrating unstable→testing ― handover

2013-09-07 Thread Peter FELECAN
"Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński" writes: > I've pasted in the integration documentation into our wiki: > > http://wiki.opencsw.org/automated-release-process#toc4 > > The issue is still open, we're looking for someone to handle > catalog integrations. IMHO, we need to find somebody to implement the a

Re: [csw-maintainers] Integrating unstable→testing — handover

2013-09-07 Thread Matchek
I've pasted in the integration documentation into our wiki: http://wiki.opencsw.org/automated-release-process#toc4 The issue is still open, we're looking for someone to handle catalog integrations. Maciej ___ maintainers mailing list maintainers@lists.

Re: [csw-maintainers] Integrating unstable→testing — handover

2013-07-11 Thread Matchek
2013/7/11 Oliver Kiddle : > I'm replying to two messages here. > > Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński wrote: >> We've kept the 'stable' dead for a while now. What do you think about >> pointing the 'stable' symlink at dublin and the 'testing' symlink at >> kiel? > > I'd definitely be in favour. The old sta

Re: [csw-maintainers] Integrating unstable→testing — handover

2013-07-11 Thread Oliver Kiddle
I'm replying to two messages here. Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński wrote: > We've kept the 'stable' dead for a while now. What do you think about > pointing the 'stable' symlink at dublin and the 'testing' symlink at > kiel? I'd definitely be in favour. The old stable release is way too ancient and i