Hi Erol, the model which was used back in oi-build/illumos-userland times wasn't that bureaucratic. In short, you posted a change set, people reviewed it and LGTM-ied it. If your received 3 LGTMs, you package was added to the source tree. The only problem with this was that from certain time there weren't enough LGTMs and the contributor had to hunt those LGTMs and actually this was one of the reasons, which led people away from contributing. Do you think that similar model could work with less LGTMs? How long are you willing to wait before somebody will give you LGTM and not get a feeling that the process is bureaucratic and slows you down?
Cheers, Adam On Jul 10, 2013, at 3:24 AM, Erol Zavidic <[email protected]> wrote: > Folks, > > I just want to notice a thing or two from my side that might be relevant for > the OI (hipster). > > What I've seen and consider really important is to implement a kind of > release engineering. And here I do not want some complicated process with > many approvals and stuff - rather a sleek and streamlined (hipster) release > management. > > I've seen packages breaking builds because of incompatible versions (e.g. > libmemcached bump made myself incompatible with php5.4, or ruby version > breaking other stuff...). > > Is it feasible to organise a non-bureaucratic release management setting the > priorities which packages should get updated first and then possibly check > for defects produced by it? > > Just a thought - and willing to help with it. Let me know your thoughts. > > Cheers, Erol > _______________________________________________ > oi-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ oi-dev mailing list [email protected] http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
