On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Michael K. Johnson
<johns...@rpath.com> wrote:
>> If we're just going to point people to fl:2-qa, it's time to promote
>> to release.
> Amen!
>
>> I understand that at this point, PackageKit is no worse than it has
>> ever been in any respect, and in most cases better. It's not like
>> there wasn't significant memory usage before, and several sources
>> of extra memory use have been cleaned up.
> PackageKit is not even included anymore, so my vote is (and always
> been) to release now, please?
Separate set of issues.
a) Making public a set of current 2-qa images is doable, and represents
no great risk.
I'm generating atm a full set of QA isos atm, which we can make
public. We need to
do a good job communicating the audience that _they_ are still QA
isos, still (we 're
getting too used to rock stability there these days :) )
b) regarding fl:2. the problem isn't what is in 2-devel (and 2-qa now),
is the update path.
fl:2 has a too old conary (with known issues and PackageKit). So at
the time of a promote
from 2-qa to it, groups pre-update scripts need to be wired to (at
least) erase existing
PackageKit there (or at least blocking its ability to initiate
updates) and get some way to
notify users to do an 'updateall'. mkj do you volunteer for this ?
António
_______________________________________________
Foresight-devel mailing list
Foresight-devel@lists.rpath.org
http://lists.rpath.org/mailman/listinfo/foresight-devel
