On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 21:12, Richard Shaw <[email protected]> wrote: > > Does it make sense for packages to wait in testing for two weeks when they > are new packages? >
Thanks for bringing this up. I was hoping to get this mentioned before FLOCK etc but we have been snowed under in Fedora Infrastructure. I would like for the developers and consumers to give some feedback on what they think are appropriate deadlines. The ones we have now are mostly inertia. > For example, all the packages I'm building for the first time in epel8... > > Even outside of new packages I rarely get karma for my Fedora packages, much > less for my EPEL packages and two weeks is a "long time". I have some > upstreams where I have to skip releases because they update within the two > week period and the policy of obsoleting an update when a new one is created > would mean they would perpetually be in testing and never make it to stable. > Would those upstreams make more sense in epel-playground only? Those go into the compose tree as soon as possible. > Perhaps it would be a good idea to let the maintainer determine if a previous > update should be obsoleted or not when pushing a new update? > > Thanks, > Richard > _______________________________________________ > epel-devel mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] -- Stephen J Smoogen. _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
