Rawhide boot problems

Lennart Poettering mzerqung at 0pointer.de
Fri Sep 7 23:58:35 UTC 2012

On Fri, 07.09.12 11:54, Jesse Keating (jkeating at j2solutions.net) wrote:

> On 09/07/2012 11:48 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >Humm. I don't agree with this. As long as F18 is unreleased Rawhide will
> >be basically untested and I also wonder what testing it at this point
> >would bring, given that it right now is mostly F18 and very far from
> >F19, so why not test the real F18 where we need all testing focussed
> >anyway?
> Fedora 18 is basically closed for new feature work, and instead the
> focus needs to be on integration of the existing feature set and
> bugfixes.  But as you state there is a large amount of time before
> F18 releases, which means new feature work would have to stall out
> for months.  Instead, new feature work can begin for F19 and get
> ahead of the game.  That's why F18 and F19 are divergent.  That's
> why we went from a single line of development to two.

I totally understand that. However this is not really how many people
work. The assumption that everybody actually wants to get started asap
with new feature development is simply wrong. I tend to focus on
stabilization and bugfixes for quite some time before I switch back to
feature development, and I actually believe most people should do it
that way. And because I do it that way I want to keep F18 and F19 in
sync for as long as I can. I want to decide on my own when we are ready
and when I want to have F19 diverge from F18, and it shouldn't be
implied that this is immediately done when pre-alpha is branched.

Or to put this in other words:

The default workflow should be that package developers focus on
fixing/polishing the upcoming release. The exception should be that
package developers immediately forget about the branch and focus
immediately on new features.


Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.

More information about the devel mailing list