Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (508 mails)

[Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 07:19:49PM +0100, Lars Müller wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 12:35:18PM -0500, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Philipp Thomas
> > <Philipp.Thomas2@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 13:18:20 +0100, Stefan Dirsch <sndirsch@xxxxxxx>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > And breaking other's repos is any better?
> > >
> > > Where did I say that? I still think that given the BS turnaround times
> > > it would be better to have a testbed repo where things can be dropped
> > > in to be tested.
> > >
> > > I fully agree with you that such changes should be well tested before
> > > being allowed into an official repo.
> >
> > I haven't followed the full issue here, but I hope / assume that there
> > will be a Tumbleweed testing repo before this is process is fully
> > baked.
>
> No, no, no.  Please keep this process simple.  All of us are willing to
> drive Tumbleweed _while_ we need to kept focused.
>
> At the time we created network:samba:STABLE and TESTING we had a long
> discussion regarding if we need network:samba:3_2, n:s:3_3, n:s:3_4 and
> so on.  And I always argued: keep it simple.  Less repositories are
> better and focus the testing.  Using an additional repositories from the
> openSUSE Build Service (OBS) is already hard enough for the majority of
> our users.
>
> Short messager: less repositories are better.

I agree.  And in this vein, I've linked from network:samba:STABLE into
openSUSE:Tumbleweed now, and the packages are working great, thanks.

I'm building some semi-automated tools to monitor changes in "parent"
repos so I should catch it if you update the packages in this repo, but
if I miss them, and you want me to update them, just let me know.

thanks,

greg k-h
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx