FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

[Jesse Keating]

On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 02:52 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Such as? We're filling a niche, this is one of our unique selling points, 
> you want to throw out the baby with the bathwater!

Your baby is my bathwater.  I don't want the operating system you're
trying to build.  If you feel that there is a niche here for what you're
trying to build, then it shouldn't be hard for you to find like minded
people to stake out your own piece of the linux user pie.  I wish you
luck with that.

> 
> > I'm tired of waiting for many many hours while we try to compose out the
> > 3444 individual updates in F11 stable.
> 
> The fact that it takes hours is really a failure of our mash process. Extras 
> managed to deal with this in a much more efficient way: they pushed only the 
> new stuff and then had scripts to clean out the old stuff (and a process to 
> request manual deletion if old stuff was not being cleaned out for some 
> reason). How much old stuff was in the repo was mostly irrelevant for the 
> time a push took.
> 

Extras had significantly fewer packages, no multilib, no deltarpms, no
update metadata, fewer arches, and was ran on different hardware.


-- 
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/20100302/e8686db7/attachment.bin