was: Plan for tomorrow's (20070604) Release Engineering meeting

[Michael Schwendt]

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 03:19:03 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 08:51:31PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Monday 04 June 2007 20:46:52 Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > So do a rebuild for test1.
> > 
> > Which is well before the feature freeze and thus not really suitable for what 
> > you're trying to accomplish.
> 
> Well, that was a reply to some comments from Michael which w/o a quote
> I can't even remember if it was ironic or meant that way.

Which is one of the fundamental problems whenever we meet eachother.
I don't have bad intentions or interest in non-obvious ironic comments
(not in #240835 either).

Here's the quote, some comments below:

| If we somehow try to prepare binaries right in time before test1 in
| accordance with a clear roadmap, I'm fine with that. I still would like to
| see maintainers be the ones to touch packages if they need to be touched
| and not just for rebuild-fun.

It could be either one: A scheduled deadline in the roadmap with a request
to maintainers to [at least] try rebuilding their packages once in a given
period. Or a mass-rebuild like those Matt Domsch has done separately, but
which publishes successful rebuilds in rawhide and collects build failure
logs somewhere. In either case, I would prefer if the maintainers or
co-maintainers had to push a button in that procedure. Such an attempt at
touching/updating packages early, e.g. right in time before test1, is not
to be understood as a freeze or final rebuild. It's just an event to
test how many packages still build.