Am 15.08.2011 22:26, schrieb Raphael Hertzog: > On Fri, 12 Aug 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote: >> Le jeudi 11 août 2011 à 20:31 +0200, Michael Biebl a écrit : >>>> The alternative is to backport the necessary changes in g-s-d (which >>>> sounds insane) or to re-add the necessary support in nautilus (which is >>>> far from trivial). >>> >>> I'd rather just have automount support broken temporarily, tbh. >> >> I don’t think there is any point in testing if we break such basic >> functionality for a long period of time. But that’s for the RT to decide >> anyway. > > +1 That's not the kind of brokenness that we want in testing. I would consider non-functioning automount for a (short) period of time as acceptable compromise, but ymmv. > It's nice to be able to split transitions, but when it's not possible our > infrastructure should cope with large transitions. So do you want to wait until this magically happens? When would that be? Right now, transitions are quite a bit of manual work and the more transitions are entangled the harder it gets. > With everything more or less working in experimental, what exactly do you > fear? Not by far. See the comments about e.g. libpanel-applet. There is an awful lot of work to be done to get everything into shape. The nautilus transitions is already complex enough imho (involving a mini-transition for evince, brasero, gnome-media, libgdata and possibly gnome-bluetooth and nautilus-sendto). Personally I'd be fine with dumping everything into unstable, but imho we could have a transition which would last over several weeks or months and which certainly would block other transitions. That said, it's not really up to me to decide and I'll just wait now what the release team wants us to do. Cheers, Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
Description: OpenPGP digital signature