On 03/28/2017 09:12 PM, Ruediger Meier wrote:
On Tuesday 28 March 2017, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
Rüdiger Meier schrieb:
[...]
For me the successful build of the whole Leap distro is some kind of minimal test-case which we should not break. I do not care much about my particular sbcl package. Just can't understand why it breaks each minor Leap update. How could it be worse on the old non-LTS release model?
Then we wouldn't be able to change anything in the core system as something always breaks (It is then quickly fixed). Would you also say we have to hold back from adding SLE updates if they break 1-2 packages? The reality of a distro the size of leap is when you update something it may well break something else, but we really have no way of telling what will until the update is pushed (although for everything on the DVD we can and do tell, but everything else is hard). So stuff will break people will fix it (or it will get dropped) and thats the reality of developing a distro. A update that breaks the build of 100-200 core packages will almost certainly be rejected but one that breaks just a few (especially when we can't tell) will most likely be accepted and when something breaks people get emailed and stuff gets fixed. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B