ayo apt rawhide repositories

[Jef Spaleta]

Rg wrote:
> but updating is the whole idea of Rawhide, isn't it?

Rawhide is many things...but what it is not typically is something you
can do a fresh install or a full distribution upgrade with....and if
rawhide is anything its bleeding edge. Using selective rawhide binary
packages right now on rhl9 box is not the wisest idea. And rawhide is
not necessarily self-consistent, rawhide can have a lot of breakage in
it, especially when new core pieces of technology show up. You don't
necessarily want to be running rawhide when a new glibc lands for
example.But the brokenness of rawhide waxes and wanes depending on where
development is in the release cycle. During a beta/test phase...like we
are in now, rawhide looks a bit less experimental because developers are
by and large focusing on stitching the pieces together so they actually
work as a distribution.A lot of beta/test bug squashing gets done in
rawhide during this phase of the cycle..so rawhide becomes very
beta/test relevant, and is a useful tool for people who are actively
invovled with bug hunting and know what they are doing....

Unless i misread something in the new website...there is still a focus
on the idea of a time based release schedule so that specific
collections of packages can be place together and labeled as a specific
distribution version...even if the new naming scheme is silly...its
still a numbering and naming scheme quite similar to what has come
before.  A saw no evidence that there is a shift to the evil idea of the
rolling release where there is only one main tree. We are going to have
named and numbers 'releases' and those name and numbered releases will
have access to specific package updates between official releases as
binary compatibility allows.  

> My question is simply that, in all its innocence, is a ayo rawhide 
> update equivalent of the rawhide updates on the RH server? Whether 
> this is the best method for "updating,"

You were talking about test1->test2...which is more of an upgrade
instead of an update. Best method be damned!!!!! when the test2 isos
come out there is an expectation that ever beta tester reinstall test2
either fresh, or as an upgrade from a previous official release.
Upgrading from test1->test2 via apt may or may not be 'best' for
you...but thats not important. What is important is what testers are
expected to do as part of this testing process.  Until the policy as to
what are this community's supported upgrade paths from one official
release to another is revised, updating between official releases is
expected to use the iso install media or related floppy boot images just
as the beta/test releases do. Use of apt or yum is clever and it make be
best, but distorts the point of this test phase...for now.


-jef"thinks there really needs to be tester's guide in the participate
section of the website that spells out what testers are expected to
do"spaleta
-------------- 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-test-list/attachments/20030923/a4445fc0/attachment.sig>