Re: Question for all candidates: Release process
* Charles Plessy <firstname.lastname@example.org> [100317 01:52]:
> I propose that we reshape the sections and priorities of our archive, so that
> it is easy to remove from Testing any RC bug that is not in a core pakcage,
> and is old and not tagged RFH.
How is that different from the current procedure?
> In parallel, I propose that the definition
> of what the ‘core’ is can vary between architectures.
And do you think that will make it easier or harder to do a release?
> The goal is not only to reduce the workload of the release team and the
> porters. It is also to give some meaning to the presence of a package in a
> stable release. These packages must be there because there is agreement that
> enough users are insterested in it, and are comfortable with the idea to keep it
> at the same version for a long time.
So you think we currently put things in which we do not want to keep the
> For many peripheral leafs and branches of our dependancy tree, let's innovate
> and distribute them through other channels, like official backports and even
> the new snapshot system that is being set up.
Welcome to the first circle of rpm hell...
Bernhard R. Link