Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (1134 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-factory] Calling for a new openSUSE development model
  • From: Nelson Marques <nmo.marques@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 18:10:39 +0100
  • Message-id: <CAHWXQKMPVZ=0ug_uMc4wzzM-gufqLfVnoYDCnxY0AXhP72jrLA@mail.gmail.com>
Stephan,

If there's anything you believe I can help with, I don't mind helping
as long as I can have some kind of tutorship (someone who I can
address my doubts in an effective way).

For all the rest, I'm not the right person to suggest anything beyond
the fact we need faster reviews :)

NM

2012/6/14 Stephan Kulow <coolo@xxxxxxx>:
Hi,

It's time we realize delaying milestones is not a solution. Instead,
let's use the delay of 12.2 as a reason to challenge our current
development model and look at new ways. Rather than continue to delay
milestones, let's re-think how we work.

openSUSE has grown. We have many interdependent packages in Factory. The
problems are usually not in the packages touched, so the package updates
work. What's often missing though is the work to fix the other packages
that rely on the updated package. We need to do a better job making sure
bugs caused by updates of "random packages" generate a working system.
Very fortunately we have an increasing number of contributors that
update versions or fix bugs in packages, but lately, the end result has
been getting worse, not better. And IMO it's because we can’t keep up in
the current model.

I don't remember a time during 12.2 development when we had less than
100 "red" packages in Factory. And we have packages that fail for almost
five months without anyone picking up a fix. Or packages that have
unsubmitted changes in their devel project for six months without anyone
caring to submit it (even ignoring newly introduced reminder mails).

So I would like to throw in some ideas to discuss (and you are welcome
to throw in yours as well - but please try to limit yourself to things
you have knowledge about - pretty please):

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
 to.
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.
3. As working more strictly will require more time, I would like to
 either ditch release schedules all together or release only once a
 year and then rebase Tumbleweed - as already discussed in the RC1
 thread.

Let's discuss things very openly - I think we learned enough about where
the current model works and where it doesn't so we can develop a new one
together.

Greetings, Stephan

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




--
Nelson Marques
// I've stopped trying to understand sandwiches with a third piece of
bread in the middle...
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
This Thread
Follow Ups
References