Release Engineering Meeting Recap from Monday 16-APR-07

[Brian Pepple]

On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 11:26 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 21:42 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 17 April 2007 11:48:27 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > >> Are we not rebuilding the packages with "fc6" names in Fedora 7? I did
> > >> ask FESCo but afaik no final decision was made. What about packages that
> > >> dist tags in the future releases?
> > > 
> > > No.  Rebuilding just to change dist tags is a completely silly operation. 
> > 
> > I think we just disagree on that. The value of rebuilding is more than 
> > just changing the dist tag. The fear against is exactly the reason why 
> > we should be doing it in the first place. Ensuring that they don't 
> > "accidentally" get new features during a security update after the 
> > release is a measure of quality.
> > 
> >   Our
> > > distribution releases do inherit from previous releases, the dist tag just 
> > > makes that point visually.
> > 
> > So one might have "fc6" packages in Fedora 8 and "fc7" packages on 
> > Fedora 10 too? You don't think that's "silly"?  Btw did FESCo even 
> > discuss this at all?
> 
> It was not discussed last week.  I will explicitly add it to the agenda
> this week.

Do we want to address this again?  We've said for a while now that we
were not planning on doing a mass rebuild for this release.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee/Meeting-20070301

/B
-- 
Brian Pepple <bpepple at fedoraproject.org>

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E
BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B  CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20070418/5f1bc914/attachment.sig>