2011/5/5 Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org:
On Thu, 05 May 2011, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Also, having the unstable-next suite you've mention would tight more the
deployment of rolling to other project mechanisms, while the rest of the
proposal enjoyed much more decoupling.
There's no
On May 9, 2011 08:48:25 am Teodor MICU wrote:
To conclude, unstable-next suite (or some other name [2]) is a
requirement for rolling [3].
Thanks
[2] but not experimental
...unless the nature of experimental is changed, and its current function
replaced with PPA's?
- Bruce
--
To
Hi Teodor/Bruce,
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 05:48:25PM +0300, Teodor MICU wrote:
I've been disappointed at first to read that so many approve this
rolling implementation that in fact is just c-u-t, constantly
usable testing [1]! Outside of the freeze period it doesn't really
matter and one can
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 00:36:23 (CEST), Russ Allbery wrote:
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 10:39:29AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Yes, during the freeze I ran into trouble with OpenAFS because I had
too many different streams that I wanted to test at the
On 04/05/11 at 22:19 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
While I like the idea in general, I think that it should also be
possible to upload packages directly to rolling (through
rolling-proposed-updates). It will be useful in
Hi,
On Wed, 04 May 2011, sean finney wrote:
It's an excellent idea. Some of the initial feedback that I've gotten
about DEP-10 (in particular some brainstorming on IRC with Carsten Hey)
is pointing at ideas along these lines, and I hope to flush them out
in a bit more detail RSN. But I
Le jeudi 05 mai 2011 à 08:23 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
Could you please give a concrete example of where this would be needed?
I think all existing cases should be covered by uploading directly to
either t-p-u or unstable.
Use case:
During freeze, there's a library transition in
On 05/05/11 at 08:51 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 05 mai 2011 à 08:23 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
Could you please give a concrete example of where this would be needed?
I think all existing cases should be covered by uploading directly to
either t-p-u or unstable.
On 05/05/2011 08:50 AM, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 12:05:22AM +0300, Cristian Henzel wrote:
What to do during freezes
-
I’m not sure we really need to do something different in times of
freeze. Our time would be better spent by reducing the
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 08:58:31AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 05/05/11 at 08:51 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 05 mai 2011 à 08:23 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
Could you please give a concrete example of where this would be needed?
I think all existing cases should be
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 09:07:28AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 08:58:31AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 05/05/11 at 08:51 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 05 mai 2011 à 08:23 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
Could you please give a concrete example of
On Wednesday, May 04, 2011 04:58:31 PM Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 04, 2011 04:25:35 PM Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 02:24:12PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
What to do during freezes
-
If we want to do something
Scott Kitterman wrote:
Currently Experimental is the place to upload things not ready for use except
under very narrow circumstances. It gets abused as a place for new versions
during freeze as it is, but if it's the defined path into Rolling during
freezes then there's a need to separate
On Thursday, May 05, 2011 08:03:39 AM Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Scott Kitterman wrote:
Currently Experimental is the place to upload things not ready for use
except under very narrow circumstances. It gets abused as a place for
new versions during freeze as it is, but if it's the defined path
Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com (05/05/2011):
I personally don't think uploading packages to experimental before
it is time for them to participate in transitions to testing and
integrate with the rest of the next stable distribution is abuse at
all. In fact I wish people would do it more
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 08:46:10AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Yeah, experimental is not really the good place. We really want in
rolling only packages where we have the assurance that they will land
in unstable the day after the release (so automatically and not with
a manual source
Pierre Habouzit madco...@madism.org writes:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:19:45PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
While I like the idea in general, I think that it should also be
possible to upload packages directly to rolling
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 06:51:35PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Pierre Habouzit madco...@madism.org writes:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:19:45PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
While I like the idea in general, I think
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org writes:
Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com (05/05/2011):
I personally don't think uploading packages to experimental before it
is time for them to participate in transitions to testing and integrate
with the rest of the next stable distribution is abuse at all.
* Pierre Habouzit [2011-05-05 07:46 +0200]:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:48:46PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
If more new upstream versions are uploaded to unstable (because they are
targeted at rolling), it raises the number of RC bugs needing to migrate
to testing through t-p-u. How would you
On Thu, 05 May 2011, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 08:46:10AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Yeah, experimental is not really the good place. We really want in
rolling only packages where we have the assurance that they will land
in unstable the day after the release (so
On Thu, 05 May 2011 10:39:29 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Being able to tell bug reporters “please check what happens with the X
stack in experimental” (which had more or less latest upstream release
candidates or releases), and closing with those versions; or forwarding
upstream if bugs
On Thu, 05 May 2011 17:46:34 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Yeah, experimental is not really the good place. We really want in
rolling only packages where we have the assurance that they will land
in unstable the day after the release (so automatically and not with
a manual source
gregor herrmann gre...@debian.org writes:
Same idea: Would an experimental suite that's filled during the freeze
to keep unstable free for RC bug fixes and migrates after the thaw plus
(a) PPA(s) for experimenting (sic!) with newer releases help here?
Yes, absolutely. And PPAs would be
On 12471 March 1977, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
What I expect to be needed is to make rolling a real suite that
retains packages. That will probably be needed sometimes. Though
packages only in rolling should be a transitory situation that the
rolling team is expected to minimize.
Early on in
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 10:39:29AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org writes:
Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com (05/05/2011):
I personally don't think uploading packages to experimental before it
is time for them to participate in transitions to testing and
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 10:39:29AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Yes, during the freeze I ran into trouble with OpenAFS because I had
too many different streams that I wanted to test at the same time. I
was using experimental for the upcoming 1.6
Pierre Habouzit madco...@madism.org writes:
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 06:51:35PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Pierre Habouzit madco...@madism.org writes:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:19:45PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 ÃÂ 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 12:51:33AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Pierre Habouzit madco...@madism.org writes:
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 06:51:35PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Pierre Habouzit madco...@madism.org writes:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:19:45PM +0200, Josselin
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 07:48:45PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
* Pierre Habouzit [2011-05-05 07:46 +0200]:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:48:46PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
If more new upstream versions are uploaded to unstable (because they are
targeted at rolling), it raises the number of RC
Hi,
during the recent discussions about rolling, a proposal was made in a
blog comment, and after giving it some quick thoughts, most people I’ve
talked with seem to think it is a good idea, so it’s time for it to be
discussed at large.
It starts from the following fact: if you want a testing
[Josselin Mouette, 2011-05-04]
This would be a pseudo-suite, like experimental. Except that while
experimental is built on top of unstable and filled manually by
maintainers, rolling would be built on top of testing and filled
semi-automatically. A rolling system would have typically 2 APT
Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
[Josselin Mouette, 2011-05-04]
This would be a pseudo-suite, like experimental. Except that while
experimental is built on top of unstable and filled manually by
maintainers, rolling would be built on top of testing and filled
semi-automatically. A rolling system would
Hi,
I came to the same conclusion than you after the discussion we had in
the comments of your article. I think it's the right approach. I still
have a few comments though.
On Wed, 04 May 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
It starts from the following fact: if you want a testing system that
works
[Didier Raboud, 2011-05-04]
While I agree with the demotivation stance, why can't those packages be
uploaded to experimental, fwiw ?
because that's not what experimental is for and it's harder to use it
(did you notice that python3.2 is in experimental or did someone gave
you proper
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 15:30 +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
On Wed, 04 May 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
It starts from the following fact: if you want a testing system that
works correctly, you usually have to add APT lines for unstable, while
pinning them to only install specific
On Wed, 04 May 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
It doesn't need to be a pseudo-suite. It's a collection of packages taken
in testing or unstable, it's not more complicated to make it a full suite.
It cannot be “just” a full suite. When you add a package coming from
unstable, you must also
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes:
This way, when something is broken in testing and cannot be unbroken
quickly, a maintainer who notices it could add (or make the people in
charge add) the necessary packages to the override file. If, for a
reason or another, an important bug fix or a
Piotr Ożarowski dijo [Wed, May 04, 2011 at 03:22:07PM +0200]:
[Josselin Mouette, 2011-05-04]
This would be a pseudo-suite, like experimental. Except that while
experimental is built on top of unstable and filled manually by
maintainers, rolling would be built on top of testing and filled
Hi,
(you already know, but let's state that on dd@ too)
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org (04/05/2011):
during the recent discussions about rolling, a proposal was made in
a blog comment, and after giving it some quick thoughts, most people
I’ve talked with seem to think it is a good idea, so
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 16:20 +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
A full suite can have 2 versions of the same source package and
can contain both libgnomekbd4 and libgnomekbd7. It's not a problem.
OK, so I officially do not care a shit™.
What the britney-like thing could do is bring
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 02:24:12PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
The new “rolling” suite
---
This would be a pseudo-suite, like experimental. Except that while
experimental is built on top of unstable and filled manually by
maintainers, rolling would be built on top
Hi,
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes:
The new “rolling” suite
---
This would be a pseudo-suite, like experimental. Except that while
experimental is built on top of unstable and filled manually by
maintainers, rolling would be built on top of testing and filled
On 04/05/11 at 14:24 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Hi,
during the recent discussions about rolling, a proposal was made in a
blog comment, and after giving it some quick thoughts, most people I’ve
talked with seem to think it is a good idea, so it’s time for it to be
discussed at large.
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 03:30:40PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Wed, 04 May 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
It starts from the following fact: if you want a testing system that
works correctly, you usually have to add APT lines for unstable, while
pinning them to only install specific
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
While I like the idea in general, I think that it should also be
possible to upload packages directly to rolling (through
rolling-proposed-updates). It will be useful in cases where neither the
package in testing, not the package
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:19:45PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
While I like the idea in general, I think that it should also be
possible to upload packages directly to rolling (through
rolling-proposed-updates). It will be
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:17:03PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
If you want to go ahead with patching britney, by all means go ahead, as
it might provide patches useful for the main brintey as well. But if you
want to try some alternatives, we can probably help.
I don't think you need to
* Pierre Habouzit [2011-05-04 22:23 +0200]:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:19:45PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
While I like the idea in general, I think that it should also be
possible to upload packages directly to rolling
On Wednesday, May 04, 2011 04:25:35 PM Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 02:24:12PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
What to do during freezes
-
If we want to do something different though, there is a simple recipe:
allow packages to be picked
What to do during freezes
-
I’m not sure we really need to do something different in times of
freeze. Our time would be better spent by reducing the freeze time and
making it more predictable; squeeze has been an awesome step in this
direction.
If we want to do
Hiya,
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:25:35PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 02:24:12PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
What to do during freezes
-
If we want to do something different though, there is a simple recipe:
allow packages to be
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 6:40 PM, sean finney sean...@debian.org wrote:
[...]
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:25:35PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 02:24:12PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
What to do during freezes
-
If we want to do
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:48:46PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
* Pierre Habouzit [2011-05-04 22:23 +0200]:
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:19:45PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
While I like the idea in general, I think that it
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 12:05:22AM +0300, Cristian Henzel wrote:
What to do during freezes
-
I’m not sure we really need to do something different in times of
freeze. Our time would be better spent by reducing the freeze time and
making it more predictable;
55 matches
Mail list logo
