On Sun, Aug 4, 2019 at 12:53 PM Bernhard Rosenkraenzer <b...@lindev.ch> wrote: > > Hi, > rolling is looking good so far -- hasn't broken badly, and has quite a few > nice updates we don't want to bother 4.0 users with. > > But I'm a bit concerned about minor updates that get pushed into cooker not > making it to rolling (even though rolling is where in the end releases will > happen), probably because people [including myself, got to get into it] tend > to forget about the small updates once they're there. The auto-updater also > never pushes stuff to rolling. > > I wonder if we should reverse the logic here a bit: Right now, we push stuff > from cooker to rolling/testing manually. > It may be better to have a way to manually mark packages that are not ready > yet (e.g. toolchain updates that need more extensive testing) and > automatically build everything not marked that way in rolling after a couple > of days. > > Keeping cooker and rolling separate is probably necessary, because for some > things they will diverge A LOT at some point (imagine the Qt 5 -> Qt 6 > transition that will likely happen next year... Got to get cooker to > Qt6/Plasma6 quickly while keeping rolling stable). > > Any thoughts/opinions? >
Ignoring the fact that I think that the scheme in general is going to be hard to maintain, I think we need a button to queue a commit to be built for rolling and cooker at the same time. That way, it's a lot easier to get stuff pushed into rolling. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- Cooker mailing-list https://www.openmandriva.org/lists
