pushing updates for FTBFS

Michel Alexandre Salim michael.silvanus at gmail.com
Tue Sep 21 17:09:52 UTC 2010

On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:06:09 -0700, Eric Smith wrote:

> For an FTBFS for a new Fedora release, does it really make sense to have
> the seven day delay?  I don't see what the downside would be of allowing
> it to be pushed to stable immediately.  Even if there's something wrong
> with the update, it isn't going to replace a working package.
Just because the package is no longer buildable does not mean the 
existing build no longer works, though. Case in point: the breakage of C+
+ programs every time the GCC compiler suite is updated, due to stricter 
standard compliance in the new compiler version.

It's arguable that, in that case, since the maintainer has to do some 
patching themselves, that having a test period is actually more essential 
than is normally the case, when it's the upstream developers that touch 
the package.

Michel Alexandre Salim, MSc., University of Erlangen-Nuremberg
Open Source Research Group, Applied Software Engineering
Web: http://osr.cs.fau.de,  Email: michel.salim at cs.fau.de
                GPG key ID: D09272F7

()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments

More information about the devel mailing list