Plan for tomorrow's (20070604) Release Engineering meeting

[Brian Pepple]

On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 17:26 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 11:59:23 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> 
> >    Unfortunately this cycle we haven't done a mass rebuild, but
> 
> It's not unfortunate. It's great that packages, which work in FC6, don't
> need a rebuild and continue to work in F7. For several binaries the
> opposite is true, and you can install fc7 packages also for fc6. I don't
> like superfluous rebuilds or rebuilds which result in cosmetic changes
> only, such as an updated dist tag. For every rebuild there ought to be a
> good reason and a visible and worthwhile goal for the package, plus a
> packager who verifies the build results.
> 
> There are problems in some packages, which are not fixed by automatic
> rebuilds and which are not found by automatic rebuilds either. Instead
> of a mass-rebuild I'd prefer a roadmap, so that after some clear and
> strict freeze there won't be any unexpected modifications anymore, such
> as API/ABI breaks. Planning-safety for packagers to know till when to
> prepare their packages.
> 
> All the testing with rawhide and test releases is void when we test
> static packages, which are rebuilt automatically just for fun, and
> shortly after the final release of the distribution, packagers get
> active and push major version upgrades and stuff that breaks
> dependencies.

+1. 

/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-maintainers/attachments/20070604/49b2c164/attachment.sig>