3 days without pushes ?
pbrobinson at gmail.com
Sat Feb 14 13:04:42 UTC 2015
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Sérgio Basto <sergio at serjux.com> wrote:
> On Qui, 2015-02-12 at 14:41 -0500, Corey Sheldon wrote:
>> Aka patience and to be totally honest and blunt, if you have a
>> alpha/beta tester group and or a solid forum/mailing list with updates
>> to status this should seriously not be a setback 3 weeks on the other
>> hand might qualify.....Appreciate the eagerness to partake in
>> development /packaging but things happen from time to time learn to
>> roll with the tides as they say
> yeah, but we should have some regularity, I don't like waiting without
> knowing the delay, in this case is pushing to stable, is just for my
> organization, to see what is in stable and what let in testing, and I
> have been patient.
Ultimately packages have to be signed, for that to happen the key
needs to be unlocked by a human so it's a manual process for security
reasons. We generally try and push updates daily but at times
travel/sickness and issues with infrastructure cause this to be
delayed. This is regrettable but it's a fact of life. There's no SLA
as to when and why the updates happen it is after all a community
> But when someone else send a package to testing and I want test it, if
> we don't have a push to testing, force me download packages manually .
> The point here is push to testing should be more quickly than push to
> stable .
The updates whether to testing or to stable is a manual process to
unlock the signing key. It also has to be synced out to mirrors, it's
not the quickest process and the team of people that do them aren't
paid to do it as their only job hence the reason it happens daily.
More information about the devel