On 12/02/2013 06:25 AM, Richard Brown wrote:
On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:50 +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Our testing are devel projects. I bet some use devel:gcc to test gcc and report bugs before you send it to Factory. But not enough.
That is exactly how I prefer to operate when testing/maintaining GNOME
Using GNOME:Factory (the gnome devel repo) with Factory gives me a way of testing all of the 'incoming' GNOME changes.
If something in our GNOME devel repo fouls up, I'm a simple 'zypper removerepo' and 'zypper dup' away from getting my machine back to 'usable' so I can get working on figuring out what broke in GNOME
The only reason I don't use this approach 24/7, 365 days a year is that with our current approach, Factory isn't 'stable' enough. Or to put it another way, there's about as much chance (if not more) every time I 'zypper up' my machine that recent updates to Factory are going to break my system, as the recent updates to our GNOME devel project..
I think the suggestions so far take us huge strides towards making Factory usable in exactly the kind of way *I* need it.. which is why I'm so excited by them.
Well I HATE rebooting my machine, sitting on top of Factory would imply kernel updates on a more regular basis and that doesn't work for me. Rebooting 2 or 3 times during the 8 month release cycle is more than enough for me. If we do not chase the kernel in the new Factory model, but only update the Factory kernel every 3 months or so when there is a new upstream release then I am OK with it, but if we have RC releases in Factory and I would end up having to reboot every two weeks as the kernel release cycle is approaching a new release that is just not going to work for me. Later, Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center LINUX Tech Lead Public Cloud Architect 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