On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Albert Astals Cid aa...@kde.org wrote:
El Dimecres, 13 de febrer de 2013, a les 01:21:07, Andreas K. Huettel va
escriure:
Am Dienstag, 12. Februar 2013, 22:05:00 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 15:28:35 Anke Boersma wrote:
This whole
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Myriam Schweingruber myr...@kde.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Albert Astals Cid aa...@kde.org wrote:
El Dimecres, 13 de febrer de 2013, a les 01:21:07, Andreas K. Huettel va
escriure:
Am Dienstag, 12. Februar 2013, 22:05:00 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:
El Dimecres, 13 de febrer de 2013, a les 08:02:16, Martin Gräßlin va escriure:
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 01:00:13 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
El Dimarts, 12 de febrer de 2013, a les 22:05:00, Martin Gräßlin va
escriure:
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 15:28:35 Anke Boersma wrote:
This
Since the original email in this thread came from the Chakra-Project, and
we asked if the Arch Linux devs would co sign and send, seems it is needed
we explain/respond one more time.
At Chakra-Project we do not feel there is any need to change the way the
release is handled, 4-5 days in between
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 11:57:21 Anke Boersma wrote:
As to point 2, having a much clearer set policy, that any distro can convey
to their testers must surely result in less badly placed bug reports.
Testers who have to read documentation just to be able to use a certain
repo, are far more
But this is the exact point I'm trying to make. Educate early testers to
report any issues they find within the distro. We have done that for 3
years, and is well known and accepted by our testers (this includes testing
all beta and rc builds for Chakra).
It is just a 3-4 day period, many early
Hi Anke,
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Anke Boersma
abveri...@chakra-project.org wrote:
But this is the exact point I'm trying to make. Educate early testers to
report any issues they find within the distro. We have done that for 3
years, and is well known and accepted by our testers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Now let's assume we would have the packages out in the wild for
4.11 prior to release. The version information reported by DrKonqui
is 4.11.0 - no matter which tarball is currently running. At the
same time there's still an RC out (4.10.98).
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Martin Gräßlin mgraess...@kde.org wrote:
Would a solution like introducing dedicated versions help here: maybe. It
would require each developer working with such issues to track the release
team mailing list to get the notification of a respin, the new version
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 19:27:49 Ralf Jung wrote:
* add git tags and bugzilla versions at the same time as tarballs are
created
gues who creates the bugzilla versions and no I don't think it would scale to
burden that to the release team.
--
Martin Gräßlin
signature.asc
Description: This
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 10:43:37 Ian Monroe wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Martin Gräßlin mgraess...@kde.org wrote:
Would a solution like introducing dedicated versions help here: maybe. It
would require each developer working with such issues to track the release
team mailing
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 19:25:46 Myriam Schweingruber wrote:
Hi Anke,
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Anke Boersma
abveri...@chakra-project.org wrote:
But this is the exact point I'm trying to make. Educate early testers to
report any issues they find within the distro. We have
To get a clear picture then, our early tar builds should be completely
hidden (not possible on our server), even-though no regular user has access
to them, and any bugs found in the early tars (not build related) should
be kept quiet, until the tars are officially announced. It is better to
have
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 14:37:22 Anke Boersma wrote:
any bugs found in the early tars (not build related) should
be kept quiet, until the tars are officially announced. It is better to
have final tars that have bugs that were known for a few days, than
reporting.
What kind of bugs are
This whole thread was about stable tars, not RC or Beta. What was found
and reported often, is regressions from say, 4.x.2 to 4.x.3.
Reported not in bug reports, but more a discussion on IRC, see if anyone
was aware, sometimes ml, again, just checking if it was a known/accepted
regression.
On
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 15:28:35 Anke Boersma wrote:
This whole thread was about stable tars, not RC or Beta.
Sorry at least to me that was not obvious. (thread started on 31. of January,
doesn't mention minor releases, so I assumed it meant the upcoming release of
4.10) - all I wrote so far
Same holds up for 4.x.0 too. Again, this is about the time between tagging
the tars, and announced release. Regressions found between RC3 and the
tagged tar for kde 4.10.0 in the last case.
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Martin Gräßlin mgraess...@kde.org wrote:
On Tuesday 12 February 2013
El Dimarts, 12 de febrer de 2013, a les 11:57:21, Anke Boersma va escriure:
Since the original email in this thread came from the Chakra-Project, and
we asked if the Arch Linux devs would co sign and send, seems it is needed
we explain/respond one more time.
At Chakra-Project we do not feel
El Dimarts, 12 de febrer de 2013, a les 18:32:32, Martin Gräßlin va escriure:
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 11:57:21 Anke Boersma wrote:
As to point 2, having a much clearer set policy, that any distro can
convey
to their testers must surely result in less badly placed bug reports.
El Dimarts, 12 de febrer de 2013, a les 19:27:49, Ralf Jung va escriure:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Now let's assume we would have the packages out in the wild for
4.11 prior to release. The version information reported by DrKonqui
is 4.11.0 - no matter which
El Dimarts, 12 de febrer de 2013, a les 14:37:22, Anke Boersma va escriure:
To get a clear picture then, our early tar builds should be completely
hidden (not possible on our server), even-though no regular user has access
to them,
Can you please clarify if your tarballs are public or not? A
El Dimarts, 12 de febrer de 2013, a les 15:28:35, Anke Boersma va escriure:
This whole thread was about stable tars, not RC or Beta. What was found
and reported often, is regressions from say, 4.x.2 to 4.x.3.
Right, regressions are bad, we all have them, but as said, raising the flag 2
days
El Dimarts, 12 de febrer de 2013, a les 22:05:00, Martin Gräßlin va escriure:
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 15:28:35 Anke Boersma wrote:
This whole thread was about stable tars, not RC or Beta.
Sorry at least to me that was not obvious. (thread started on 31. of
January, doesn't mention minor
The problem is that this is most of the times this is too late. We
usually
have like 5 days between tag and release, meaning you start reporting bugs
at
day 2 or 3 which gives the developer a highly stressful 1-2 days to try to
fix
bug.
If you want to help with testing, i think that
Am Dienstag, 12. Februar 2013, 22:05:00 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 15:28:35 Anke Boersma wrote:
This whole thread was about stable tars, not RC or Beta.
Sorry at least to me that was not obvious. (thread started on 31. of
January, doesn't mention minor releases, so
El Dimecres, 13 de febrer de 2013, a les 01:21:07, Andreas K. Huettel va
escriure:
Am Dienstag, 12. Februar 2013, 22:05:00 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 15:28:35 Anke Boersma wrote:
This whole thread was about stable tars, not RC or Beta.
Sorry at least to me that
El Dimarts, 12 de febrer de 2013, a les 19:15:50, Anke Boersma va escriure:
The problem is that this is most of the times this is too late. We
usually
have like 5 days between tag and release, meaning you start reporting bugs
at
day 2 or 3 which gives the developer a highly stressful 1-2
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 01:00:13 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
El Dimarts, 12 de febrer de 2013, a les 22:05:00, Martin Gräßlin va
escriure:
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 15:28:35 Anke Boersma wrote:
This whole thread was about stable tars, not RC or Beta.
Sorry at least to me that was
On Monday 11 February 2013 00.24.51 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
El Diumenge, 10 de febrer de 2013, a les 08:15:40, Martin Gräßlin va
escriure:
On Saturday 09 February 2013 23:08:50 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
Of course another option is lifting the requirement for the pre-packages
not being
El Diumenge, 10 de febrer de 2013, a les 08:15:40, Martin Gräßlin va escriure:
On Saturday 09 February 2013 23:08:50 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
Of course another option is lifting the requirement for the pre-packages
not being publicly available, after all the packages will most likely be
the
Am 05.02.2013 20:42, schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
El Dilluns, 4 de febrer de 2013, a les 21:26:31, Andrea Scarpino va escriure:
We'd like to know if we can put the packages in a repository not enabled,
neither available, at install time. The instructions on how to enable this
repo are in a
El Dissabte, 9 de febrer de 2013, a les 19:19:24, Pierre Schmitz va escriure:
Am 05.02.2013 20:42, schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
El Dilluns, 4 de febrer de 2013, a les 21:26:31, Andrea Scarpino va
escriure:
We'd like to know if we can put the packages in a repository not enabled,
neither
On Saturday 09 February 2013 23:08:50 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
Of course another option is lifting the requirement for the pre-packages not
being publicly available, after all the packages will most likely be the
real thing, so if everyone agrees it is better lifting this requirement, we
can
El Dilluns, 4 de febrer de 2013, a les 21:26:31, Andrea Scarpino va escriure:
On Monday 04 February 2013 21:03:48 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
Can you provide an easier way to find Dirk's mail, like a webarchive mail
or at least an approximate date of the email and the subject?
ATM I can't
El Dijous, 31 de gener de 2013, a les 22:42:20, Andrea Scarpino va escriure:
LS
Since there is not a clear answer yet, and both the undersigned Distro's
feel a better way of testing the tagged tars is needed during the 4-5 days
before they are officially released, we'd like to make a
On Monday 04 February 2013 21:03:48 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
Can you provide an easier way to find Dirk's mail, like a webarchive mail or
at least an approximate date of the email and the subject?
ATM I can't find it neither (the discussion about this issue forked from the
original topic), but
On Saturday 02 February 2013 08:17:15 Rex Dieter wrote:
Has anyone ever explicitly said making packages available to targetted
testers was a *bad* idea?
Yes, take a look to Martin's thread in date 3th June 2012. Also, I've been
'call back' time ago (about two years ago or less) from a KDE dev
On 01/31/2013 03:42 PM, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
We, as Arch Linux and Chakra-Project developers would like to propose now
to follow the recommendation set by Dirk Mueller in the last long ml thread
regarding this issue, and have the build packages from the tagged tars
available to our testers
LS
Since there is not a clear answer yet, and both the undersigned Distro's
feel a better way of testing the tagged tars is needed during the 4-5 days
before they are officially released, we'd like to make a proposal on behalf
of the Linux distributions Arch Linux and the Chakra-Project.
39 matches
Mail list logo
