On 12/02/2013 08:32 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013, Stephan Kulow wrote:
On 02.12.2013 11:39, Richard Biener wrote:
With the Debian 'testing' distribution
approach you scale QA by
making people using 'unstable' (aka Factory) do testing and file
bugs which blocks packages from migrating from 'unstable' to
'testing' unless they are fixed. So to throw in another name
(than the appearantly misleading Tumbleweed), 'testing' is a
rolling release for 'unstable'. Do we want a rolling-released-Factory?
Our testing are devel projects. I bet some use devel:gcc to test
gcc and report bugs before you send it to Factory. But not enough.
Probably. I thought of devel projects as 'experimental', because
the devel projects are where development happens, not where
candidates for Factory reside, no?
Well, yes an no. As Michal, I think, pointed out yesterday and I am
paraphrasing "devel projects are for packages on their way to factory."
But, while this may have been the original intend, in practice devel
projects are being used for packages on their way to factory as well as
packages people would like to have visible in a devel project but do not
want to maintain in the "distribution proper." THus devel projects today
serve at least 2 purposes.
Which immediately makes me
think that we can automate this by immediately accepting submitrequests
to Factory into a single Factory:staging project (without "review").
Every problem in computer science can be solved by a level of indirection ;)
Thus factory:staging turns into what factory is today. Or one can go the
other way as has also been discussed and say factory stays as it is and
we use factory:tested as the "rolling factory release". The latter may
be more amenable to the picture people already have in there heads.
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center LINUX
Public Cloud Architect
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org