Re: wheezy postmortem re rc bugfixing
Hi,
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 05:28:58PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> Other steps to take as preventative measures:
> * Make it a *MUST* that all transitions, no matter how small, are
> checked with the release team starting from as soon as the freeze is
> announced (not just after it starts) such that uploads which start a
> transition could be pushed into DELAYED or REJECTed automatically. (Not
> easy to implement this one, I know.)
This could be implemented by building uploads to unstable against testing
instead of unstable.
Currently problematic uploads to unstable don't affect users of testing
because they will not migrate, but they do affect development of testing
(which is done in unstable), because they will prevent reverse
build-dependencies from migrating.
If uploads to unstable were built against testing, uncoordinated uploads of
build-dependencies would not affect development, because they would not be
used by the autobuilders until they were allowed to migrate to testing. They
would still be used (and tested) by developers running unstable on their
systems.
To allow developers to adapt their packages to newer versions of
build-dependencies, they should be able to selectively choose
build-dependencies from unstable. A similar setup is already implemented for
experimental (which builds against unstable by default, unless the
build-dependencies explicitly specify packages from experimental). Newer
versions of build-dependencies could also be specified for binNMU's, to allow
rebuilds for transitions.
The implementation of PPA's might allow individual developers to build their
packages against testing and move these to unstable.
Cheers,
Ivo
Reply to: