| 1 |
Jason Wever wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 11:02:33 -0500 |
| 3 |
> "John Davis" <zhen@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>>I disagree - a snapshot is not a freeze in the same way that our old |
| 7 |
>>release policy called for. Although you can do what you are saying |
| 8 |
>>(versions, etc), the tree itself never freezes. Gentoo is a fluid |
| 9 |
>>distribution. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I understand that Gentoo is a fluid distribution, but how can you provide |
| 13 |
> quality QA on a set of packages if they are constantly changing, |
| 14 |
> particularly when trying to build binary sets for distribution? |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> In order to do proper QA, there is going to have to be some stagnation |
| 17 |
> between the snapshot and the live portage tree (1.5 to 3 weeks for build |
| 18 |
> time and proper QA for a given arch). Other than the critical or security |
| 19 |
> related bug fixes, what are we going to be using as the demarcation for |
| 20 |
> updating packages in the snapshot, and how will we be ensuring that all |
| 21 |
> arches are using the same versions of programs (where applicable)? |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
We could add a "tinderbox" targed that will try to run in chroot a full |
| 24 |
automated setup (a la glis) from the latest stage {1 2 3}+grp and then |
| 25 |
have a testsuite running on it. |
| 26 |
It won't be a full QA check but at least the minimum needed. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Luca Barbato |
| 30 |
Developer |
| 31 |
Gentoo Linux http://www.gentoo.org/~lu_zero |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
gentoo-releng@g.o mailing list |
Archives