On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 11:00:15 +0100
Michal Novotny <clime(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com>
> > I honestly don't understand what is purpose of the f26 vs master.
> > Why we have empty master currently (speaking of dist-git)? master
> > should be the same as rawhide, as it is in Fedora.
> Yes, I think that makes more sense as well.
> P.S. Adding devel to the recipient list so that more people can
Well, my thought was this would be a good way to clean out old stale
right now we have f26 (rawhide), f25, f24
once we branch f26, projects have f26, f25, f24 and if they like they
can enable and rebuild for the now existing f27 (rawhide).
When f24 goes eol and is disabled, look at projects that don't have any
builds anymore and remove them.
repeat each cycle. This means you need to pay attention and rebuild
your coprs for new branches as they appear, but it also means if you
don't the old project disappears.
That's true but maybe if we make sure the time of the latest build is
clearly to the user of the copr, it will be enough.
Of course many projects also build for epel, so they would stick around
for that reason for a long time.
If we move back to having a rawhide/devel/master repo the problem
becomes "which rawhide" ? if you build something in that branch a year
ago, what are the chances it will still work?
Yeah, not very high chances. However, rawhide is still moving so people
do expect the packages there not to have very wide 'it-works' lifespan.
If I consider a use-case of a package developer/maintainer that wants to
his or her package for next Fedora release, then I think that for those
(I met one), rawhide naming is more intuitive and I would like to be good
Just my thoughts...
Thank you, Kevin.
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org