On Sex, 2016-11-25 at 17:55 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > So we already do pretty much what you outline above. I started
> > the
> > first push to f25-updates on the Friday before the release.
> I think, we are talking past each other.
> You seem to be referring to "the freeze" in terms of the final
> release push,
> while I am talking about what you'd probably call alpha or beta
> Actually, I am referring to the stage of the release preparations,
> rel-eng stops pushing packages from "update-testing" to "main".
> This stage, in case of f25, has taken ca. 3-4 weeks (IIRC).
> During this stage, many fc25 updates stalled in updates-testing,
> while their
> fc23/fc24/rawhide counterparts had been pushed into "main" =>
> broken update
Yes, but they will be resolved before GA ships assuming the
maintainers have pushed them stable.
I liked the "post-release" idea but in other terms, in 3-4 weeks we got
more than 500 packages sent to updates stable, IMHO we should push it
to base and respin again, test it for 3 or 4 days and do GA , or maybe
more simple after respin it and call it release N.1 (25.1) .
I believe in last 4 week before GA, packages send to stable are bug
fixes or not core packages etc, if test goes wrong we may postpone the
Every release we got always tones of updates in day 0, on upgrades and
non-live versions everyone will update the computer , if we use
netinstall iso already include updates, only live versions could have
breaks , but shouldn't be a better live version with the 500 packages
Last time that we talk about this, the strongest argument was no man
power to test 2 versions, ok so before begging test the new version ,
give it a spin of stability on release version , that is my idea.
Sérgio M. B.