On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 17:59 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Which does nothing to help the upgrade and n-v-r case.
Only if "updates" is not activated upon installation.
Anaconda doesn't support this, and even if it did, network isn't always
available to people when doing the upgrade.
>> There would be times where it hardly would be used, but
there can easily
>> be times, when it would be heavily used (e.g. there currently is a
>> proposal pending which would severely change perl's behavior (perl
>> module search order and file system layout), with currently unclear
>> outcome).
>
> How would one choose to use it?
Similar to "updates-testing"
yum install --enable-repo=rawhide-testing "package-i-want-to-test"
etc.
I meant how would a maintainer choose to use rawhide-testing as opposed
to pure rawhide. Would they have to specifically craft a make build
command with a TARGET= ?
> Why would anyone choose to use bodhi if
> they were allowed to build directly into rawhide?
You mean to push a package to rawhide-testing instead of rawhide?
Primary reason: Because the maintainer is aware about his package
containing some
"nasty"/"adventurous"/"dangerous"/"experimental"
etc. changes/bugfixes, with unclear outcome and him wanting to avoid
destabilizing the distro.
> Should we force the
> use of bodhi during freezes, and make it optional otherwise?
IMO, maintainers need _one_ single package submission UI, which should
be used on all occasional/in all phases of development.
ATM, this would mean making bodhi mandatory and to get rid of trac etc.
My point was when do we force the use of bodhi. I would think if we
forced the use of bodhi for every single package build ever we'd create
a riot of angry maintainers.
I agree with you that having both trac and bodhi is non-optional. We
just didn't have the time/manpower to develop bodhi to a point where it
could be used to drive freeze break requests.
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca:
http://identi.ca/jkeating