On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 19:16:39 +0200
Lennart Poettering <mzerqung(a)0pointer.de> wrote:
On Fri, 07.09.12 11:00, Kevin Fenzi (kevin(a)scrye.com) wrote:
> > I think our policy is that you should do rawhide builds, but at
> > least some significant groups of packagers actively don't do
> > rawhide builds. If that is going to continue, we should consider
> > having rawhide inherit from updates-testing.
>
> I'd like to propose the opposite:
>
> Lets drop any inheritance between branched and rawhide.
>
> Is it really that much trouble to commit/build in rawhide first?
Yes, it effectively doubles my Fedora workload.
I don't think it doubles it. I agree it increases it some, but it also
adds a layer of smoketesting and doublechecking, so IMHO it's worth it.
> Thats where you should be doing your development anyhow. Then,
only
> if all looks well, should you push to branched.
Dude, I already have to look afer way too many distros at the same
time. I see no point at all in developing two development distros
simultaneously. As long as I don want my F18 and F19 version of
packages diverge I see no point in doing everything twice.
But f18 and f19 _are_ diverging behind your package. Some of the time
you might not notice, but it's happening.
It sounds really bogus to me to develop to distros at the same time
rather than just focussing on stabilizing one of them and let the
other just get a copy of my packages.
Think of rawhide as not another distro, but another packageset/check.
I mean, I don't really like doing packaging work that much. I do
it
because it is necessary, not because it is fun. You know what is even
less fun? Doing everything twice if things could just as easily be
inherited automatically.
Perhaps you could try and find some package maintainers to do that work
for you while you work on upstream issues?
kevin