Robert Schweikert - 14:23 3.12.13 wrote:
On 12/03/2013 01:21 PM, Michal Hrusecky wrote:
Robert Schweikert - 12:59 3.12.13 wrote:
...
Correct. I agree that having basically one person doing this (coolo today) is not a good approach and we need to fix this problem. What I am not so confident about is that those touching the very core packages have the interest/knowledge/energy/time to chaperone a staging branch.
If AJ pulls a new glibc from upstream and tons of stuff breaks in the staging project we are basically asking AJ to be coolo and run after all the package maintainers that now have broken stuff. From my point of view that doesn't really resolve the basic problem, it just shifts the problem onto the shoulders of someone else. That someone else most likely has less time to chase all the broken stuff than coolo. I am not advocating to stay with what we have, I just fail to see how the staging of updates improves the situation overall. Certainly coolo will do less chasing and that's a good thing, but will the distribution as a whole improve or are we more likely to get stuck with older versions because the new chaperones of the staging branches do not have the time/energy etc. to chase everything that happens to break?
You missed the second part. No new version of the broken package will get in unless it fixes the staging project.
Hmmm that would require that everyone that is a staging tree chaperone knows about all the broken packages in all staging projects. If the chaperone's do not poses this knowledge a new version of the broken package can enter factory through an unrelated staging branch.
No, staging project maintainer needs has a staging project and OBS shows him, which packages are broken. He can ask OBS who are the maintainers and try to ping them and help them to fix their stuff. He doesn't need to know anything about other packages, he just needs to know something about his and how to communicate.
So now both maintainers are stuck with old versions that work together. And it is in the interest of both of them to resolve the issues.
Nope, it is in the interest of the user that they resolve the issue, not necessarily in the interest of the packager.
Well, only if packager doesn't care if he has a package in Factory... What it doesn't solve is inactive - presume dead - maintainers. This is general issue, that should be addressed in different discussion. -- Michal HRUSECKY SUSE LINUX, s.r.o. openSUSE Team Lihovarska 1060/12 PGP 0xFED656F6 19000 Praha 9 mhrusecky[at]suse.cz Czech Republic http://michal.hrusecky.net http://www.suse.cz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org