Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (1134 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-factory] Calling for a new openSUSE development model
  • From: Adrian Schröter <adrian@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:13:45 +0200
  • Message-id: <1944232.nczqZ5PxZQ@scherben>
Am Donnerstag, 14. Juni 2012, 12:01:53 schrieb Stephan Kulow:
On 14.06.2012 11:52, Guido Berhoerster wrote:
On 14.06.2012 10:46, Stephan Kulow wrote:
1. We need to have more people that do the integration work - this
partly means fixing build failures and partly debugging and fixing
bugs that have unknown origin.
Those will get maintainer power of all of factory devel projects, so
they can actually work on packages that current maintainers are unable
2. We should work way more in pure staging projects and less in develop
projects. Having apache in Apache and apache modules in
Apache:Modules and ruby and rubygems in different projects may have
appeared like a clever plan when set up, but it's a nightmare when it
comes to factory development - an apache or ruby update are a pure
game of luck. The same of course applies to all libraries - they never
can have all their dependencies in one project.
But this needs some kind of tooling support - but I'm willing to
invest there, so we can more easily pick "green stacks".
My goal (a pretty radical change to now) is a no-tolerance
strategy about packages breaking other packages.

How about a multi-tiered Factory to address this and have all changes go
into an openSUSE:Factory:Staging project and only migrate packages to
openSUSE:Factory after a certain delay when they do not break others or
introduce serious regressions. Factory would then ideally always build
and thus make it easier to cut releases at fixed dates. I guess the
downside would be increased fragmentation when it comes to testing.

That would move the problem to :Staging - we could only move packages to
Factory once everything in staging built, which would be (without other
changes to the process) never.

But you could remove such packages in :Staging easily, so original Factory
would be active again.
The packager can fix it in his devel project and submit it again to :Staging.

So you would basically establish an automatic revert policy via that.

The advantage of having just one :Staging instead of multiple ones would be that
all eyes would be at the same spot.

Adrian Schroeter
SUSE Linux Products GmbH
email: adrian@xxxxxxx

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
This Thread
Follow Ups