Re: architecture-specific release criteria - requalification needed
On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 04:12:45AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Then again, maybe the m68k buildd maintainers do have time to
> periodically review stale dep-waits that they've set, to check them
> for correctness; that would be a pleasant surprise.
We do this, but it gets deprioritized when there's a backlog. As is the
case right now.
> Either way, it's only an issue for *me* when I notice it before
> someone else does. :) And I know it takes me longer to notice a wrong
> dep-wait than it takes me to notice a maybe-failed package that could
> be requeued.
> Anyway, this isn't end-of-the-world stuff, it's just a simple observation
> about how having more people involved does bring a corresponding cost of
> team coordination.
I'm also convinced that the way we do things in our team currently isn't
the optimal way to do team-based buildd maintenance; I do have some
observations I'm considering to share with my fellow buildd maintainers.
Most of these involve optimizing a few things, making better agreements,
and pushing some things we're already doing right now to more extremes.
Just need to flesh out my thoughts on that a bit before I go ahead.
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond