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

Re: My first message... more of a mad mans rant...



On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 01:17:44PM -0500, Stackpole, Chris wrote:
> >To be blunt... -Fail-
> >That is not what I have suggested what so ever in any way shape or
> form.
> >
> >I could re-explain but I won't... you just wasted 8 reading paragraphs 
> >of my life listening to you arguing against a suggestion I didn't make.
> >
> >Please re-read what I suggested in my -original- message and not the
> one 
> >with the highlights for the other person that totally misunderstood the
> 
> >purpose of original message.
> 
> 
> OK. I will. I quote from your original email:
> 
> "If we had Alpha releases, say 'lenny-alpha1' release at a point where
> there's no major block/crash-like problems being caused then people
> could download that milestone release.  'lenny-alpha1' could then not
> update until 'lenny-alpha2' is released"
> 
> Sounds like you want to have pre-stable release to me. It's called a
> Release Candidate.
> 
> I still see no reason to have separate releases or stages within
> testing. I think it is more trouble then it is worth for the developers.

to add to this... it sounds like OP is asking for known good snapshots
of lenny to be tagged somehow and frozen until the next known good
snapshot comes along. Okay, it's an interesting idea, but I think it's
a non-starter for several reasons:

1) who determines what constitutes a known-good snapshot? 

2) and which of the roughly 18000 packages are to be included in the
snapshot?

3)does that mean that the entire repo is duplicated at that point in
time? that adds roughly 25% of the current repo size for every
snapshot that is kept around

4) security updates? the security team has enough to do already, you
don't seriously think its a good idea to "freeze" a potentially
bug-ridden pre-release set of packages without security support, do
you?

5) if security support is provided for alpha snapshots, is security
expected to backport fixes to the latest alpha snapshot even if
testing has moved on to another later version but hasn't yet kicked
out a new snapshot yet?

it's a complicated thing that OP proposes, I think. ISTM that it's
much easier to realize that testing is a "moving target" alpha
release (complete with security support, BTW) and the RC's are beta
releases.

.02

A

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: