The future of "rawhide" (was [Fwd: Re: "What is the Fedora Project?"])

[Jesse Keating]

On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 10:55 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> So to make this a reality, we need to ensure that whatever is in rawhide
> has a *>=* ENVR than anything in the other trees.  So I assume that when
> submitting a bodhi update, bodhi would check rawhide and ensure that
> whatever you were about to submit to 13-pending was <= whatever was in
> rawhide.  Otherwise we'd get into a great big mess of not being able to
> update to rawhide packages because whatever was in 13-pending was
> 'newer' than rawhide.  Right?
> 
> We should have this anyway just to help upgradability between distros;
> bodhi should not allow a package to be added to an update if it's a
> "newer" ENVR than that same package in any of the "newer" distros. 

Yes, but it may happen before the bodhi stage, when we get autoqa
working on post-build tests.  This kind of check could happen at SCM
commit time, package build time, or finally bodhi push time.  Seems
reasonable that we'd want to catch it as early as possible, but that
does force people to work on rawhide first, then work on the pending
release which may be under critical time pressure.  Certainly something
to discuss.  Catching it at bodhi time seems too late.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20091022/720483c6/attachment.bin