Re: contingency plan for the failed-to-build spins/labs?
On Monday, June 20, 2016 12:48:03 PM CDT Matthew Miller wrote:
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 09:32:23AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> Jam failed due to package issues, its package set was not installable, dnf
> aborted the transactionso anaconda failed to install, it will be getting
> removed and will have to follow the process for a new spin if it is to
> ever
> come back, same as any spin that misses the boat, however given that SoaS
> and
Okay, that's fair for Jam.
> As we move into a more automated way doing one off things like this
> is going to get harder and harder to accomodate and do anything
> about. Relaistically at this point doing anything here is more up to
This seems backwards to me. As we get more complicated and develop
automation to assist with that complication, we need to get _more_
flexible, not less. I'd love for Spins to be able to ship when the SIG
for each one determines that their thing is ready - if someone wants to
fix up Jam, release it next month or whatever.
We are not resourcesd or setup for something like that. We would need some
number of new resources approaching on probably 4-5 maybe more people in order
to do anything. We are doing what we can with the resources we have. In order
to do more and do it faster something has to give. that something today is the
hacks to do thinsg off to the side.
For that matter, it'd be nice to have the option for the main
Editions
- if there's something that only affects Workstation or Server, don't
hold up the other (or the underlying release) for it.
From a PR point of view, the releases don't drive press like they used
to - I think we'd actually be better served by more, smaller
announcements. From a user adoption point of view, releases aren't the
driver either - data shows a download spike for new releases, but
overall the total Fedora users curve grows independently from that.
People come for whatever release is current and don't generally wait
for the splash of the next one.
What you are talking about is essentailly forking the distribution into
multiple distributions, Which needs a lot more resources. there is additional
legal complications over things like source matching that we ignore today due
to having the Everything repo with the matching sources. we would have to make
many more repositoryies, extra stress and load on infrastructure and mirrors,
release engingeering, QA, and many other parts of the ecosystem. I think we
need to talk because there is only so much we can do given what resourcing we
have.
Dennis