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

Re: A hack to alleviate transitions in Britney; now what?

On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> As said above, failures to build against the new library are RC from
> day 0, and the intention is not to do transitions while those are
> open, other constraints permitting.

> As for packages that are rebuilt in unstable but not migrated, I
> don’t think RC bugs are approriate, since they’re not bugs in the
> package.

Right; I really only meant the cases in which someone has to do
something to clean up the transition. (For things that only the RMs
can do, it doesn't really make a difference to me how it's tracked,
though bugs in the BTS against an appropriate psuedopckage using the
'affects'[1] mechanism to indicate which packages have a problem would
help other people besides the RMs know what was going on.)

> In addition to what Steve explained about the inevitable necessity
> to bend the rules for entangled transitions, let me clear up that
> this is not any flag in britney that enables the behavior
> permanently or globally. This applies to a transition on a
> case-by-case basis, with a conscious decision and need for manual
> action. Also, it is my expectation that the need for this will
> mostly disappear once we get this first batch of transitions done.

That's good enough for me. I didn't understand that it involved manual

Don Armstrong

1: This isn't working 100% yet; I hope to have an announcement about
it and summary shortly.
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle
is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to
 -- Richard Feynman "What is and What Should be the Role of Scientific
    Culture in Modern Society"; 1964

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Reply to: