Re: A concrete proposal for rolling implementation
On 05/05/2011 08:50 AM, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 12:05:22AM +0300, Cristian Henzel wrote:
>>> What to do during freezes
>>> I’m not sure we really need to do something different in times of
>>> freeze. Our time would be better spent by reducing the freeze time and
>>> making it more predictable; squeeze has been an awesome step in this
>>> If we want to do something different though, there is a simple recipe:
>>> allow packages to be picked up from unstable, but also from
>>> experimental. Again, no disruption: people can keep on breaking some
>>> pieces of experimental, but if they want some other pieces to be useful
>>> for rolling users, they just need to be committed to more carefulness
>>> and to add them to the override file.
>> I also find this a very good implementation, although I would like a 'true'
>> rolling release, without any freezes at all. I'm not sure how much extra work it
>> implies or how much sense it would make to have an exact clone of testing just
>> without the freezes.
> Not a lot, I don't expect it larger than having to place a dozen hints
> usually, up to a small hundred during the peaks (100 is less than 1% of
> our source packages).
> Maintaining something like that isn't hard, it's already what the RM
> Team does to follow testing migrations, and if rolling is generated
> after testing is, the Rolling Team will benefit from the RT work so it's
> just an incremental effort. Nothing wasted.
> (And not wanting to finger point but I've read at least a certain RT
> Member saying that he would even consider help a Rolling Team as he's
> already doing that pinning on his workstation…)
I just thought that most DDs would have more important stuff to do during
freezes than cherry-picking packages from unstable to rolling, thus a clone of
testing minus the freezes, if done right, might mean a lot less work in that regard.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,