On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 16:16 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 01:10:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 15:58 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>
> > > I like to see that always be a requirement for the stable, stable+updates
> > > and rawhide (assuming the rawhide-pending tag becomes a reality).
> >
> > I would like to see this eventually too. However, we don't have a
> > capability to stop it from happening, other than our current method of
> > relying on people to do the right thing. That could effectively mean
> > that anyone could inadvertently hold up shipping a release at "the
> > edge of space" through a bad push.
>
> This isn't actually the case, as no-one can push directly to any of
> those places, certainly just prior to release. (Well, except security
> updates.) Everything goes to updates-testing first; we can catch broken
> deps there and refuse to push them into stable.
I was going to argue that we've had this problem occur in the case of
security updates with e.g. web browser stack, but on the other hand
that would be in the critical path anyway.
I may be out of touch here, for which I apologize in advance. What
mechanism currently prevents broken deps in updates-testing from being
pushed into stable?
Just the usual testing. But just prior to release the freeze is in
place, and packages are only taken from -testing to stable after manual
review by qa and rel-eng, and only to fix blocker or nth bugs; this is a
pretty intensive and managed process and we'd be very unlikely to push a
package from -testing to stable at that point which had broken deps. I
don't think it's ever happened.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net