Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (1029 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-factory] O Factory - Where art Thou?
Am Freitag, 29. November 2013, 00:12:40 schrieb Michal Hrusecky:
Susanne Oberhauser-Hirschoff - 21:06 28.11.13 wrote:
Michal Hrusecky <mhrusecky@xxxxxxx> writes:

Susanne Oberhauser-Hirschoff - 18:32 28.11.13 wrote:

* Integration means testing, and testing may be a gate/decision point
whether further builds make sense at all (think rings). This
tracking of test status is not in the tool. And tests should gate
further work based on test status. And tests, automatic or manual,
have a smart and a stupid order doing them.

So you would like to see better integration between openQA and OBS?

openQA imnsho is just another flavour of build (as in rpm, kiwi, deb,
openQA)

Not now, but probably could be integrated that way.

yes, but it would be just one little part of automated QA. Also, it could be
also kept standalone, but scheduled and reporting back in a transparent way
with OBS.

Anyway, the entire QA stuff would be actually multiple huge projects. Yes, we
should
approach them, but the more low hanging fruit is IMHO the wanted workflow
changes
regarding the staging projects. They can used also as input for all kind auf QA
systems.

So, from what I hear and read we need to decide about

* Do we always want to enforce staging projects for all submissions?
=> Means we need some support to set this up automatically as part of the
workflow?

* How should it work? Eg. a staging project

openSUSE:Factory:Stage:$NUMBER_OR_SRING

1) contains a number of unversioned links to the devel package?
+ on submission time to factory no merge conflicts will happen
- stage project may not finish, because people in devel packe are not aware
of it.


2) Or "accepting" a submit request. maybe with multiple actions, into a
stage project.
Keep working there, maybe directly together with the original submitter
and transfer
changes from there to factory with another request?
+ devel package changes can happen independend
+ we have a similar model already with the maintenance incidents. Just
that we would
not move binaries, only sources. And we would not need the
.openSUSE_X.y extensions
for package names.
- it introduces a temporary third version of the package sources, which
may lead
to more merge work.

do you see another model?

--

Adrian Schroeter
email: adrian@xxxxxxx

SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284
(AG Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstraße 5
90409 Nürnberg
Germany



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

< Previous Next >