[opensuse-gnome] Update GNOME:STABLE to 2.20, fate of GNOME:UNSTABLE
Hallo. I am just thinking about update of GNOME:STABLE to GNOME 2.20. In difference to previous versions, we may stick it to factory for awhile by using package links. Later we can copy frozen packages there physically. What about GNOME:UNSTABLE? If anybody volunteer to start update to 2.21, there is a chance. Otherwise, we can freeze or drop this repository for some time. What is your opinion about this plan? -- Best Regards / S pozdravem, Stanislav Brabec software developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s. r. o. e-mail: sbrabec@suse.cz Lihovarská 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 966 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
In difference to previous versions, we may stick it to factory for awhile by using package links. Later we can copy frozen packages there physically.
Sounds like a plan.
What about GNOME:UNSTABLE? If anybody volunteer to start update to 2.21, there is a chance. Otherwise, we can freeze or drop this repository for some time. What is your opinion about this plan?
Depends whether we want to use G:U as a staging point for updating Factory to 2.21 or whether we just link the packages in it to Factory when the latter is updated. -- James Ogley james@usr-local-bin.org http://usr-local-bin.org GNOME for openSUSE: http://software.opensuse.org/download/GNOME:/ Help end poverty: http://oxfam.org.uk/in -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
James Ogley wrote:
Depends whether we want to use G:U as a staging point for updating Factory to 2.21 or whether we just link the packages in it to Factory when the latter is updated.
There still exists no work flow for the first option - we may update G:U, but any of SuSE employee can fix particular problem in Factory in the mid-time. As a result, it might require one or more additional workdays to merge. In time of GNOME 2.18 it required ~30 manual merges. -- Best Regards / S pozdravem, Stanislav Brabec software developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s. r. o. e-mail: sbrabec@suse.cz Lihovarská 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 966 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 15:35 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
Hallo.
I am just thinking about update of GNOME:STABLE to GNOME 2.20.
In difference to previous versions, we may stick it to factory for awhile by using package links. Later we can copy frozen packages there physically.
FYI, I have this task on http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Tasks already and
it has a status, mw has more details though.
-JP
--
JP Rosevear
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 15:35 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
Hallo.
I am just thinking about update of GNOME:STABLE to GNOME 2.20.
In difference to previous versions, we may stick it to factory for awhile by using package links. Later we can copy frozen packages there physically.
What about GNOME:UNSTABLE? If anybody volunteer to start update to 2.21, there is a chance. Otherwise, we can freeze or drop this repository for some time.
I think it makes a lot of sense to use G:U for 2.21/2.23/etc. In the
longer term, we should get coordinated with the GNOME Build Brigade
(http://live.gnome.org/BuildBrigade) to do compilation tests and binary
packages for unstable GNOME releases.
--
Rodrigo Moya
May be it will be a good idea to have also a GNOME:TESTING branch in order to test new releases which are officially stable. I know that it sounds a little bit like debian approach but it is still better, packages which are quite new and have know unresolved issues to remain in testing till most of them are fixed. Nikolay Paskov (a.k.a. matematic) On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 19:56 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 15:35 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
Hallo.
I am just thinking about update of GNOME:STABLE to GNOME 2.20.
In difference to previous versions, we may stick it to factory for awhile by using package links. Later we can copy frozen packages there physically.
What about GNOME:UNSTABLE? If anybody volunteer to start update to 2.21, there is a chance. Otherwise, we can freeze or drop this repository for some time.
I think it makes a lot of sense to use G:U for 2.21/2.23/etc. In the longer term, we should get coordinated with the GNOME Build Brigade (http://live.gnome.org/BuildBrigade) to do compilation tests and binary packages for unstable GNOME releases. -- Rodrigo Moya
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 15:35 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
What about GNOME:UNSTABLE? If anybody volunteer to start update to 2.21, there is a chance. Otherwise, we can freeze or drop this repository for some time.
I think it makes a lot of sense to use G:U for 2.21/2.23/etc. In the longer term, we should get coordinated with the GNOME Build Brigade (http://live.gnome.org/BuildBrigade) to do compilation tests and binary packages for unstable GNOME releases.
Yes. But is there any 2.21 package already? If not, we should stop/drop G:U to not waste resources having exactly the same in G:S and G:U. We could revive it whenever we'll start with 2.21. -- Best Regards / S pozdravem, Stanislav Brabec software developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s. r. o. e-mail: sbrabec@suse.cz Lihovarská 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 966 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 11:59 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 15:35 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
What about GNOME:UNSTABLE? If anybody volunteer to start update to 2.21, there is a chance. Otherwise, we can freeze or drop this repository for some time.
I think it makes a lot of sense to use G:U for 2.21/2.23/etc. In the longer term, we should get coordinated with the GNOME Build Brigade (http://live.gnome.org/BuildBrigade) to do compilation tests and binary packages for unstable GNOME releases.
Yes. But is there any 2.21 package already? If not, we should stop/drop G:U to not waste resources having exactly the same in G:S and G:U.
We could revive it whenever we'll start with 2.21.
no, no 2.21 releases yet, so yes, we can wait until there is a release,
or just start adding unstable packages from SVN versions, or something
like that. But yes, I guess we can drop it until then if it's wasting
resources
--
Rodrigo Moya
On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 14:06 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 11:59 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 15:35 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
What about GNOME:UNSTABLE? If anybody volunteer to start update to 2.21, there is a chance. Otherwise, we can freeze or drop this repository for some time.
I think it makes a lot of sense to use G:U for 2.21/2.23/etc. In the longer term, we should get coordinated with the GNOME Build Brigade (http://live.gnome.org/BuildBrigade) to do compilation tests and binary packages for unstable GNOME releases.
Yes. But is there any 2.21 package already? If not, we should stop/drop G:U to not waste resources having exactly the same in G:S and G:U.
We could revive it whenever we'll start with 2.21.
no, no 2.21 releases yet, so yes, we can wait until there is a release, or just start adding unstable packages from SVN versions, or something like that. But yes, I guess we can drop it until then if it's wasting resources
The draft schedule is at: http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointTwentyone
So 2.21.1 packages will be available in < 1 month.
-JP
--
JP Rosevear
On Mon, 2007-01-10 at 11:59 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 15:35 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
What about GNOME:UNSTABLE? If anybody volunteer to start update to 2.21, there is a chance. Otherwise, we can freeze or drop this repository for some time.
I think it makes a lot of sense to use G:U for 2.21/2.23/etc. In the longer term, we should get coordinated with the GNOME Build Brigade (http://live.gnome.org/BuildBrigade) to do compilation tests and binary packages for unstable GNOME releases.
Yes. But is there any 2.21 package already? If not, we should stop/drop G:U to not waste resources having exactly the same in G:S and G:U.
We could revive it whenever we'll start with 2.21.
I don't think we should drop G:U, but I am planning to repopulate it with packages from Factory soon, and to move GNOME development into G:U, so we can work on annotating .spec files and the like soon. A different mail that I'm about to send has the details. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
Michael Wolf wrote:
I don't think we should drop G:U, but I am planning to repopulate it with packages from Factory soon, and to move GNOME development into G:U, so we can work on annotating .spec files and the like soon.
A different mail that I'm about to send has the details.
Yes, if 2.21 will come in a few weeks, we should keep it and start updating soon. I think there is a few updates from Factory, which should probably reach G:S: gstreamer* devhelp yelp & co. (maybe) gda stuff gnome-themes-extras gnome-games-extra-data python-gnome-extras maybe more. -- Best Regards / S pozdravem, Stanislav Brabec software developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s. r. o. e-mail: sbrabec@suse.cz Lihovarská 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 966 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
participants (6)
-
James Ogley -
JP Rosevear -
Michael Wolf -
Nikolay Paskov -
Rodrigo Moya -
Stanislav Brabec