Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (1324 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-factory] Will we have additional repositories for Leap as we have currently?
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Richard Brown <RBrownCCB@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 19 October 2015 at 22:02, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Richard Brown <RBrownCCB@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 19 October 2015 at 21:14, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

While addon repos have indeed been dodgy regarding stability, they
have been very valuable, so your assessment seems quite nearsighted.

Yes, it's difficult to make them hold to the same standards as stable
distributions. But unlike rolling distributions, you don't have to
risk your whole system (and time) to update some component you
absolutely need.

I'd argue my opinion isn't nearsighted, I'm speaking from the school
of experience.

I've seen it both as a user and as a maintainer.
I've done the 'rolling stuff ontop of a stable base' as a user of
I've been part of the team that built repos for that scenario with
GNOME:Stable repos (which I also used)

I would put gnome in the same bucket as Mesa, though. So your
experience, I'd say, is heavily biased towards the "not worth the
effort" portion of packages.

Okay, but then, if you're defining it as the 'very end of the tree'
leaf packages..lets say, stuff like LibreOffice?

Well, Libreoffice in *SLE 12* is moving from 4.whatever it ships to
5.0 in a *maintenance* update soon.. which is why it's been so easy
for us to throw it into Leap so late ;)

And I dont know what Wolfgang has planned for Firefox, but I guess the
point is, we already have a policy of allowing packages at that 'end
of the branch' to be updated as part of the regular maintenance of our
distributions, both in former releases of openSUSE, also in SLE, and
so I suppose no reason to think we won't also do it in Leap.

So, if your limiting your scope to just those sort of packages, you
just need to persuade the maintainers to push the changes as
maintenance updates..which should be easy to do, its less work for
them than building and maintaining whole new repos at least ;)

In that sense I guess you're right, but maintainers haven't been doing that.

Perhaps, as you say, they should just do that.

OpenQA only does
basic testing, you'll have to recognize, some things depend on people
testing, and some use cases get none of that.

openQA does pretty damn advanced testing, and I challenge you to find
something which openQA absolutely cannot test. Multi machine,
multipath, HA, real hardware, you name it, openQA can do it, or we
want to find a way to make it do it.

The biggest limitation is not the technology, but that someone has to
care enough about an issue to write a test for it

That's not that hard to do -

And there is lots of examples to learn from -

Even when there's the technical possibility of testing, it's not always done.

See what's happening with i586.

You really think if someone wrote a few thousand tests covering every
workflow for the top 90% of users, it'd actually be run? There would
probably not be enough resources to do that amount of testing.

And nobody did write that many tests. And no, it's not that easy. I
read OpenQA test scripts and they read like chinese to me, and I
consider myself quite capable of reading code in any language.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >