Request for Comments: Proposed changes to Fedora development cycle

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 11:25 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:05:51 +0200
> Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl> wrote:
> 
> > So all in all:
> > -calling it alpha / beta / release candidate instead of test# +1
> > -no freeze for alpha +1
> > -early branching (I would say a week for the RC) +1
> > -making builds in the release branch goto updates-testing after
> >   branching -1 (esp combined with early branching)
> 
> Good, discussion!
> 
> Here is the problem, if the build is not deemed "good" by rel-eng to be
> in the release after the release candidate where does it go?  Basically
> the idea is that once the RC hits, "development" of the release is
> done, but we want to enable developers to prepare updates to the
> pending release to be able to release them out to updates-testing
> shortly after the release.  Having the builds from the branch be tagged
> as if the release were already out helps in this regard, as they're
> already in the right place to be prepared as an update within Bodhi,
> and if a rel-eng request is made to bring it into the release if
> rel-eng agrees it's a simple tag action to "move it", and if we say no,
> no tagging action is necessary it's all set up to be prepared as an
> update.
> 
> Does that clarify why we're tagging them as potential updates at this
> point?
I still don't get the point.

Are you talking about rel-eng forking (== CVS branching) the "release"
at "RC-time" and launching "updates" at "RC-time"?

Ralf