Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-gnome (44 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-gnome] 2.19 Plan
- From: Andreas Jaeger <aj@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:38:30 +0200
- Message-id: <m3abwzyort.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@xxxxxxx> writes:
> James Ogley wrote:
>
>> > And should we continue with 2.19 in Factory or continue there with 2.18?
>> > What do you think?
>>
>> Will we get 2.20 in time for 10.3?
>>
>> I think I've suggested it before but maybe G:U could have a Factory
>> target added so we (in this instance) stick with 2.18 in Factory so that
>> we have a stable GNOME release in 10.3 and start building 2.19 in G:U.
>> Then, once 10.3 is released, import the work from G:U into Factory and
>> disable the Factory target on it until the next GNOME development cycle
>> comes around.
>
> Nice idea, but hard to realize. We need a NO-GO flag for SuSE
> Autobuild/Factory, otherwise people will modify tens or hundreds of
> packages in Factory with a lot of minor patches and somebody have to
> spent several days or weeks with reviewing them and merging when 2.20
> will come.
>
> I remember this problem from December, when I did /opt/gnome -> /usr
> move.
>
> Proposal:
>
> NO-GO package will have a .buildservice file in its repository.
>
> .buildservice will contain a string with BS project and package name,
> where it is maintained. More lines mean, that more versions are
> maintained.
>
> Autobuild team will reject manual updates of these files.
We really need to have factory building in the BuildService. This will
avoid all these hacks.
If we have release date of end of september for 10.3, I assume that
GNOME 2.20 will go in at the last second - but this means that we need
to have with Beta1 already a first preview in factory and then follow
with each GNOME beta,
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger, aj@xxxxxxx, http://www.suse.de/~aj/
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
> James Ogley wrote:
>
>> > And should we continue with 2.19 in Factory or continue there with 2.18?
>> > What do you think?
>>
>> Will we get 2.20 in time for 10.3?
>>
>> I think I've suggested it before but maybe G:U could have a Factory
>> target added so we (in this instance) stick with 2.18 in Factory so that
>> we have a stable GNOME release in 10.3 and start building 2.19 in G:U.
>> Then, once 10.3 is released, import the work from G:U into Factory and
>> disable the Factory target on it until the next GNOME development cycle
>> comes around.
>
> Nice idea, but hard to realize. We need a NO-GO flag for SuSE
> Autobuild/Factory, otherwise people will modify tens or hundreds of
> packages in Factory with a lot of minor patches and somebody have to
> spent several days or weeks with reviewing them and merging when 2.20
> will come.
>
> I remember this problem from December, when I did /opt/gnome -> /usr
> move.
>
> Proposal:
>
> NO-GO package will have a .buildservice file in its repository.
>
> .buildservice will contain a string with BS project and package name,
> where it is maintained. More lines mean, that more versions are
> maintained.
>
> Autobuild team will reject manual updates of these files.
We really need to have factory building in the BuildService. This will
avoid all these hacks.
If we have release date of end of september for 10.3, I assume that
GNOME 2.20 will go in at the last second - but this means that we need
to have with Beta1 already a first preview in factory and then follow
with each GNOME beta,
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger, aj@xxxxxxx, http://www.suse.de/~aj/
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
| < Previous | Next > |