[CentOS-docs] FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess
Just updated the subject page http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess based on Karanbir's comment on centos-devel: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2010-May/005545.html Is there better material available to replace the erroneous content, or should the page be removed? Phil ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess
Hi, On 05/21/2010 03:41 PM, Phil Schaffner wrote: Just updated the subject page http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess There is nothing wrong with the process mentioned on that page - its just not the one being used in CentOS anymore. So adapting the title and the headings on that page should be a good start. Specially important is that the overall gist of what is going on is correct ~ rebuilding packages, compare to upstream and push it out. - KB ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess
On 05/21/2010 04:46 PM, Alan Bartlett wrote: So, assuming you have overruled both Johnny and Russ, will you please make the one being used in CentOS known to the rest of the world. Think about it for a second, you don't feel that process's are changable ? Would you like to point me to where it says that what we were doing at one stage will never ever change ? I havent overruled anyone there, just pointed out that content on there no longer reflects the process - however, the gist of the article is still correct. I trust your wording above, and hence the implicit message, was an error. I was lead to believe, after the Lance Davis affair of last summer, that there would be no more secrecy or any unilateral decisions made by one person. Given that you are not a part of the team that handles buildsystem issues, what made you think that any of these process's were down to only one person ? - KB ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
[CentOS-docs] FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess
On Fri, 21 May 2010, Alan Bartlett wrote: error. I was lead to believe, after the Lance Davis affair of last summer, that there would be no more secrecy or any unilateral decisions made by one person. ... you know, it is gratuitious cruft and attempts at 'triangulation' like this that really causes me to dislike the acrions of some people in this project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangulation_(psychology) No one of authority has led you to believe anything on that topics of 'no more secrecy or any unilateral decisions made by one person' so far as I know, and comments like this are simply out of scope here -- Russ herrold ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Re: [CentOS-docs] FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess
Karanbir Singh wrote on 05/21/2010 12:54 PM: Hi, On 05/21/2010 05:30 PM, Phil Schaffner wrote: OK, thanks - but begs the question - What is the current process? I published this a while back : http://www.karan.org/stuff/c5-release-plan.jpeg ; which if you look at - reflects the same goals and ideas as whats on the wiki page, but uses a slightly different process. That image, again, no longer reflects the release process anymore - we made loads of changes to how we do things for 5.5, some of which paid off while others didn't. So I can imagine things are going to change again for 5.6 etc. I do remember seeing that graphic before, and I understand that the build process is a moving target. It would still be of value for educational purposes, for community relations, for people who want to create custom variants on the distro, and as a warm fuzzy to potential CentOS corporate/institutional users for insurance purposes, to have the current process openly available. And its important we reflect that on the wiki page. Whats on the page is accurate in terms of what we are doing, its just not how we do we do it, and its not going into the process at all. For now, I'd recommend changing the title of the page to something along the lines of 'The CentOS Build plan'. Which would, imho, better reflect the content under there. I'll have another look at the page in view of these comments. Thanks, Phil ___ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
