Fedora Extras packaging beta software into production repos, why?

[Jeffrey C. Ollie]

On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 12:56 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 12:36:23PM +0200, Matthias Saou wrote:
> > Axel Thimm wrote :
> > 
> > > Sorry, but I miss the humor in this, and I'm busy fixing broken stuff
> > > to get further into this.
> > 
> > Well, don't think just about the present, think about the long term :
> > You'll also be getting annoying reports about overriding Extras
> > packages regarding libpri, zaptel and asterisk, and the usual bad
> > publicity that accompanies it :-(
> > We'd be all much better off if it can be avoided!
> > 
> > To avoid this you could have submitted your packages for Extras
> > inclusion, but it's too late now. What you can do is :
> 
> When I offered it was said that zaptel is dead-before-review and
> the rest due to being dependent as well.

Zaptel would still be dead-before-review except for the fact that Digium
has recently become more open to getting the Zaptel kernel modules into
Linus' kernel tree.

> > 1) Try to pause the asterisk inclusion into Extras until further
> >    discussion happens (i.e. someone answers the "Why a beta?")

I went with the 1.4.0 betas because they are much easier to package
without ugly specfile hacks, which were objected to earlier in the
review process.  They are also pretty solid codewise despite the "beta"
appellation.

> No, I'm not going to battle this, and there is no way to "pause" this,
> after someone's "go" it's was blitz-reviewed and pushed into the repo
> in lightning speed - I wish my FE packages would slide in like that.

zaptel and libpri were not "blitz reviewed".  The review requests have
been in bugzilla since January of 2006.  The first 1.4.0 beta SRPMS for
zaptel were put up for review on October 12th and were imported into CVS
on October 14th.  The first 1.4.0 beta libpri SRPMS were put up for
review on October 13th and were imported on October 14th as well.  The
asterisk package is still under review.

I've seen many other package reviews happen in shorter time.

-------------- 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-extras-list/attachments/20061025/f4586d2e/attachment.sig>