EPEL meeting summary/minutes - 2009-07-31

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:14:45 +0200
Till Maas <opensource at till.name> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 12:41:30PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> 
> > Dealing with incompatible upgrades. (any new ideas or suggestions?)
> > (smooge-21:01:29) Wiki pages cleanup. (smooge-21:14:01)
> 
> There is some information missing about how it will be dealt with
> incompatible upgrades. Afaics they should be avoided, but if they
> can't, they should be announced, pushed to testing, announced again
> and then pushed to stable. I am not sure, whether there are any
> recommendations, about which pain is acceptable until an incompatible
> is ok.

Yeah, sadly, I was busy during this meeting so didn't get to provide
much input. ;) 

If however we want to allow incompatible upgrades like that in some
cases we should establish a procedure to doing so. (with a wiki page
explaining each step in detail). Perhaps something like: 

- Announce to epel-announce the reason for the upgrade, what the impact
  is and when the update will go to testing. 

- Wait for feedback. Perhaps each upgrade like this should require a
  bug to be filed to collect feedback and bugs/issues that can be
  worked around with the update. 

- Build incompatible version and push to testing. 

- Perhaps wait longer than normal in testing for feedback. 

- Announce again to epel-announce that the incompatible upgrade is
  coming, urge people to test with the version in testing. 

- Push to stable. 

I think it's important to try and notify users, but also important to
get feedback from other developers who might see whats to mitigate the
issues with the upgrade. 

> 
> Regards
> Till

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/attachments/20090812/915128c8/attachment.sig>