<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Stephen John Smoogen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:smooge@gmail.com">smooge@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
In some cases, expectations may be off which means we need to market<br>
our deliverables better. In other cases, they may be looking for a<br>
better way to get attention to rawhide issues when everyone else is<br>
focused on F-XX-beta. In that case we can look at a mechanism that<br>
allows for less "zero-sum" game antics of elementary school yard "you<br>
suck, no you suck more" that the threads head towards.<br><br></blockquote><div><br>I'll ask a related question. What can we do to help maintainers more effectively catch hold of brown bag issues for their untested packages?<br>
<br><br>I've read the discussion from <font color="#888888">Richard Jones which regard to how virtualization plays a role for libguestfs dev and how they are using using %check section and</font> catching problems. I think there is a lot there to mull over.<br>
<br>I've also used Kevin's rawhide instance to do pre-rawhide submission package testing on occasion when I had reason to believe my (admittedly non-critical path) packages might be be a bit wonky across an upstream release bump or something.<br>
<br>So with all that in mind, does Fedora as a project have the ability/resources to make the use of throw-away virtual instance for pre-submission testing available as part of best practice rawhide workflow? Would wide spread use of virtualized rawhide help bridge a gap?<br>
<br>-jef<br><br> <br></div></div>