Hi, On 08/02/2013 07:52 AM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:
* Jos Poortvliet
[2013-08-02 13:26]: On Thursday 01 August 2013 23:58:12 Guido Berhoerster wrote:
* Jos Poortvliet
[2013-08-01 21:35]: On Thursday 01 August 2013 08:39:01 Stefan Seyfried wrote:
Am 31.07.2013 15:46, schrieb Robert Schweikert:
More testing by more people is always good. Unfortunately to this day we have failed to come up with ideas that have any effect on the number of people that use factory.
Do we know how many people use Factory?
I mean -- lots of it is perception. People think it is not usable. Or people think it is a rolling distribution like Arch.
Both is wrong: it is usable, but it is not usable like Arch, since from time to time large-scale breakage happens.
So for people asking me if they should use Factory, i often answer "probably not", just to not put the support burden onto me.
But if we can make the "large scale breakage happens" happen less often, Factory might be a good thing for advanced users.
Let's try to revive the factory-tested snapshots, that can be used to recover from a bad update and maybe with a few howtos about how to recover from a bad factory update we can actually recommend it for daily use of advanced users.
Yeah, that's not really related to the subject. But OTOH making Factory even harder to use than it is today (today it is only hard if something breaks) is probably not the way to get more users.
Well, do we WANT users of Factory? I'm all for it if they are developers or testers, but I would strongly oppose making development ANY harder to appease 'just users' of Factory... Users should use our releases. They are welcome to use Factory but let's focus Factory on, you know, development...
Yes, we do want users as in non-developers, but a certain kind of users who have the time and are willing to report and follow up on bugs and who are able to deal with minor breakage that is unavoidable from time to time, e.g. sysadmins, enthusiasts/testers, or FOSS developers.
Sure, but I'd call that testers, and we want them for sure. But people who don't plan on contributing code or bugs, while welcome to use it, should not expect us to adjust our work to them, I think.
At least I don't mean people who from time to time boot up a Factory installation and do specific and focused testing (as dedicated testing communities in other distros do) but people who do their daily work on a Factory installation (and report issues as they run into them), if you want to call them testers then fine.
Meanwhile, there is a lot of overlap between what developers want and what non-developers want (a *more stable factory*) so this shouldn't be a big deal.
I think this proposal would for the stated reasons have an adverse effect on the stability of both development combinations of components as well as the final release and it would also affect testing by multiplying the moving parts, i.e. build targets when you get to more complex stuff like DEs.
The moving targets do not increase we still have the same stuff that changes. What we would gain is a management layer that helps us better formulate and track those changes. And the "fill up factory only once during a release" example I provided can easily be changed to "fill up factory once a week" cadence. Since the whole thing gets put together of pre-integrated components assembly should be relatively easy. factory users would get updates once a week. Later, Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center LINUX Tech Lead rjschwei@suse.com rschweik@ca.ibm.com 781-464-8147 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org