Re: Release management and testing problems
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Santiago Vila wrote:
> It's almost impossible to read a list like this one without providing
> solutions here and there, so please forgive me for doing so :-)
> Yes, build daemons should run testing...
> > - packages well tested (eg: a package that was in stable where a simple
> > documentation fix has been made)
> IMHO, this is a pseudo-problem. You can take a package in stable,
> apply a documentation fix and upload it for unstable, and yet the
> resulting package may differ greatly from the one in stable, since
> the compiler version and libraries may well not be exactly the same.
> If it's really true that the fix is harmless, and the previous version
> is already in testing, there should not be any reason why the new package
> should be stuck in unstable for more than ten days.
But it could happen that a package from testing was renamed for some certain
reason, splitted into several packages. This might cause a time delay
becaus eit requires manual intervention (editing override file). I suggest
that those cases would be handled by some kind of adjutant for ftp-admin
to split the amount of work which is expected to increase in the future
when we have even more packages.
> We should never run the risk of the stable version in testing being
> replaced by the unstable version in unstable, because that would be
> contrary to our goal of keeping testing in an always releaseable state.
Full agreement here.