On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 12:39:26PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 10:05:48PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > You know though that what you propose is what happens for unstable, and that > > after 10 days, non-buggyness and consistent build on all RC arches, the > > packages moves to testing. > > > > This sounds suspiciously like what you propose, don't you think so ? > > Nice try.
Well, i just meant that it is really overkill to do the test run in experimental, you either do it locally on your harddisk, or in unstable. > But still before the first upload on unstable of every single package, a > maintainer looked and tested the package. Or at least someone is > supposed to do so. Well, i agree for 3.08.x -> 3.09.0, but do we really need that for 3.09.0 -> 3.09.1 transitions ? Especially if we follow suit with the test proposal, and with the expressed wish of Steve, that we have some kind of test suite in each packages. This way, packages would FTBFS if they are buggy, we quickly get a FTBFS bug report, and can fix it. The less human intervention for drudge tasks the better, and it means human intervention can be focused on where it is really needed. Notice that this way of shortening the time to rebuild everything, without much human effort, means we can more easily do a full rebuild, even shortly before the freeze date, or during the freeze if an important abi changing bug appears. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
