[arch-general] Fw: [arch-dev-public] [staging] repository: Let's give it a try!
mario.figueiredo at quiettech.org
Thu Aug 12 06:52:55 EDT 2010
On 11-08-2010 18:03, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 17:41:06 +0100, Mario Figueiredo
> <mario.figueiredo at quiettech.org> wrote:
>> This would definitely get me interested in Testing.
>> Right now my Linux knowledge is limited and thus Testing is a no-go
>> zone. If however I could have a guarantee that Testing offers the same
>> package sanity insurance of the other mirrors, I could start
> In that case testing wont still be for you. There wont be any guarantee
> for testing and some pacakges might be just broken. The only thing you
> can expect that we wont break testing _by intention_ due to moving
> incomplete rebuilds in.
Well, that was precisely my point, wasn't it? Testing implies bugged
What it should however not imply is broken packages.
>> It needs to be said that this is also reflection of what one should
>> expect to encounter in the development process in the wild. Apart from
>> the potential for collaboration, the idea that the Arch repos could
>> mimic this development cycle is very appealing to me.
>> | |
>> V V
>> Development<-> Staging<-> Testing -> Release
>> Packaging maintenance is taken away from the end user, giving them
>> "safe" (it's still a beta, hence the quotes) access to Testing.
>> Meanwhile developers would separate packaging from Testing,
>> considerably giving them a lot more control over what users can access
>> from Testing.
> Staging is not a new repo/layer between the developer and testing. It's
> just meant to be a temporary storage for rebuilds. The current dev.
> cycle wont be affected. So we'll still have:
Aren't you contradicting yourself? Unless you don't plan to use staging,
you won't risk anymore having broken rebuilds on testing.
More information about the arch-general