Hi Vladimír, > In my experience, it's typically tricky to judge whether a mass-rebuild > change is potentially destabilizing without a full hydra rebuild.
I suppose that this stabilization process would take place in a feature branch (that has its own Hydra job). Then, after the change is considered stable, it's merge into "staging". > I often get many failures on Hydra that aren't trivial to fix. Often > it's darwin problems, which is a chapter for itself, but problems on > my platform common as well. There are different degrees of "stable". A change that breaks 99% of all packages is probably a tad too unstable. A change that works fine with 99% of all packages, however, is fine to merge IMHO. Packages *will* break when we add new features, and that is okay. Everyone who follows "master" must know the risks (and preferably contribute to fix the damage once it's detected). Best regards, Peter _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
