On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 00:46, Michael Scherer <m...@zarb.org> wrote: > Le vendredi 07 janvier 2011 à 19:04 +0100, Romain d'Alverny a écrit : >> So trying to summarize above discussion, I suggest as products: >> [...] >> * Websites with components: >> [...] >> - (for versions, live/dev does not make much sense here; so maybe >> just numbering, maybe just no version for a start; depends on the >> release process) > > If we intend ( and Buchan do, and I am sure that Stormi also ) to reuse > and let people reuse some of the web software we wrote outside of Mageia > ( ie, Buchan spoke of having identity to be proposed to the openldap > community ), I would keep website for the installation we have, and also > treat them as software for people who deployed it on their own server. > But that doesn't apply to everything, obviously. > > So in website, we treat our instances, and then I think that depend on > the number of instance we have. Even if I doubt we will have more than > "stable" "no stable" ( or trunk / stable, whatever the name ).
Yep. Ok, so for Mageia web apps/sites, we start with a single "production" version and leave the possibility to have the software code available in the Software products or in any other upstream bugtracker. >> * Infrastructure >> - ? (misc?) > > I do think that people should fill bug report against me elsehwere than > on mageia bugzilla. :D > For infrastructure, I guess we can simply put 1 product, and later > decide once we see what is buggy ( because we did not plan to have bugs > yet, so we cannot tell where they should be filled ). Sounds good yes. > Maybe say that we review the component every year with bug triage team ? Or whenever raised as necessary, yes. Romain