Plan for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (2010-08-10)

Kevin Fenzi kevin at scrye.com
Tue Aug 10 05:12:55 UTC 2010


On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 17:12:20 -0400
Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fedora at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello, could you provide a more detailed status of the above 2 topics
> after the next meeting?
> The following report was from last week and it is not very
> informative:
...snip...
> There has been a very long debate here in this mailing list, and yet
> we don't know what is going on.

Sure. Lets take them one at a time: 

> #topic #351 Create a policy for updates - status report on implementation
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/351

This is checking on the implementation of: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_acceptance_criteria

Much of it's in place, but there are still a few parts lacking. 
Namely: AutoQA, and the 'other updates' section one week in testing part. 
Also, there still seems to be some work that needs to happen in bodhi 
in other parts as well. 

> #topic #382 Implementing Stable Release Vision
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/382

This is tracking the implementation of the Board's: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Stable_release_updates_vision

We have been using: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Stable_release_updates_vision_implementation_ideas
as an ideas container for work on this. 

There is also an ongoing discussion on the Board list about changing
or clarifying this vision statement: 
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2010-August/008865.html

> We have seen a lot of confusion during the python-2.7 rebuilds. People
> were thinking they should submit their rebuilds to the testing repo on
> F-14 instead of the stable repo, although the stable repo contains a
> useless version of their package with broken dependencies. Some
> clarification is needed.

For non critical path, you could currently push them to stable, as the
one week in stable thing is not implemented. If they are, they need
some karma, but it should be easy to confirm that they fix the broken
dep and appear to work normally... 

kevin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100809/0739315c/attachment.bin 


More information about the devel mailing list