[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 04:37:36PM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, David Nusinow wrote:
> > What about the *massive* issues with releasing d-i due to syncing on all
> > arch's?
> Yeah, and *after* these were solved, it was "oops, we still can't release
> because of $different_problem".
> Such things are somewhat more parallelizeable than has happened during
> this release cycle.

Manpower is limited, and I'd rather have manpower be the limiting factor than
machine power. Currently, the d-i issues are incredible. Have you read what
joeyh has to do with his automated testing lab just to keep d-i development
running at a decent pace? It's simply amazing. And to get an actual d-i release
out is very difficult in practice. Passing the buck on to the other issues
doesn't resolve this issue itself: a large number of arch's places a major
burden on a limited number of developers of a core piece of our release

> > What about the various arch-specific kernel issues that have
> > popped up and the problems in getting people to make all the necessary
> > fixes?
> If it's an arch-specific kernel, ideally it should only affect that arch.

Ideally... in practice it slows down everyone, including d-i.

> Recently, $ARCH was taken off testing consideration because it was behind.
> If that's done somewhat more aggressively in the future, those problems
> are parallelizeable too, because they don't block the whole project.

In practice, this doesn't happen though.

> > What about the huge problems in getting a decently new release
> > of X in to Debian because of constant porting problems?
> See above.

See my response as well. Where's X.org in Debian?

> > What about the heavy burden on the security team?
> With a decent toolset, doing a security package for 10 architectures
> should be a nearly-constant amount of work, no matter which base the
> number 10 is written in.

In practice, this isn't true. And it's pretty well known that the security team
carries a very heavy burden as is.

 - David Nusinow

Reply to: