F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

Dennis Gilmore dennis at ausil.us
Fri Aug 23 16:56:34 UTC 2013


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 23 Aug 2013 09:33:59 +0100
Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Mat Booth <fedora at matbooth.co.uk>
> wrote:
> 
> > On 22 August 2013 16:03, Matthew Miller <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in
> >> the FESCo meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a
> >> longer release cycle for Fedora 21 -- not (right now at least) the
> >> bigger question of the 6-month
> >> cycle overall, but just, right now, slowing down for a release to
> >> get some things in order.
> >>
> >> Specifically, both Release Engineering and QA have clear needs
> >> (and even plans for) greater automatiion, but are also incredibly
> >> busy simply doing the things they need to do _now_ to get the
> >> release out the door.
> >>
> >> So, FESCo would like to see some specifics, like "If we had one
> >> week with nothing else to worry about, we could have automated
> >> generation and upload of cloud images" (to pick an example I
> >> personally care about). Or "with six
> >> months of overall delay, we could have continuous integration
> >> testing of a key subset of rawhide". Or "we could spend a couple
> >> of weeks and automate the new package and review workflow".
> >>
> >> What Infrastructure projects would be helped by this? Web and
> >> design team, would slowing down the release focus allow time to
> >> work on, oh, say, getting
> >> the Wiki beautiful (or does it not matter)? What else?
> >>
> >> As we look at Fedora.next ideas and possibly decide to start
> >> implementation
> >> in the F21 timeframe, we will likely find _new_ things that take
> >> specific work. Let's not worry about that right now. What things
> >> we do _now_ could be
> >> improved with the investment of some effort?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > Here's my favourite bugbear:
> > https://fedorahosted.org/packagedb/ticket/243
> >
> >
> > I have no idea why the package retirement process needs
> > intervention from rel-eng.--
> > Mat Booth
> > http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora
> >
> >
> There's been discussion of adding "fedpkg retire-package" to fedpkg
> which would basically just open a dead.package file to allow you to
> add an entry and then remove the contents from git, block the package
> in koji, and retire it in the package DB. I don't think anyone has
> had the time to do this yet both in fedpkg and the backend although I
> suspect this gets a whole lot easier now with fedmsg.

to block packages in koji you need to be an admin.

the plan is to teach pkgdb to block packages and get it access to a
cert with admin privileges, then have fedpkg handle git and talking to
pkgdb, then pkgdb can handle the blocking in koji. but no one has had
the time to implement it. pkgdb needs to also make sure that packages
can't be retired in stable Fedora's.

Dennis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlIXlEkACgkQkSxm47BaWfewMgCfZf0ZGxqxTODi4tAMH87VQ+Iu
66oAn1722phEFrtdXr9HKlyUIQjLqRxW
=yHHc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the devel mailing list