sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Jason Flatt <jasonflatt AT wizard.com>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] stable/testing branches
- Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 12:10:10 -0700
On Monday 29 July 2002 04:29 am, Tony Smith wrote:
>
> You're correct on all counts. If a spell is unchanged for at least 1 week
> in devel it goes to test. If it remains unchanged for another week in test
> it goes to stable. It's an imperfect process, but when you consider the
> resources and the effort required to achieve perfection it's a good
> balance.
>
> Much of the process is historical because when I started producing the
> test/stable branches we were still recovering from Kyle's unscheduled
> departure, and a key requirement was not to eat the time of the newly
> fledged section maintainers. That said, the process has worked very well so
> far.
>
> Here's what I think is required to produce a truly controlled test/stable
> branches.
>
> 1) Section maintainers must actively test and maintain their spells in all
> three branches.
>
> 2) A mirror of all versions of source code for all packages.
>
> Without both of these things, the current system is the best available. It
> gives us something of value with little extra effort or resource.
>
> Tony
Hmm, this is interesting from my perspective. As the maintainer of the ham
and printer sections, I feel that in order to accurately test the various
spells in my sections, including and especially dependencies, I feel that I
need four clean installations: 1) no X windows, 2) plain X windows, 3) KDE
and 4) GNOME. Now, if I take that with what you have suggested in your point
1, I have to triple that to include clean installations for the four
situations listed above in devel, test and stable. Whew! That's a lot! As
I currently only have one computer, I think I would need to get another
computer (with a huge hard drive) just for the testing of Source Mage. I'm
not necessarily looking for a fix, I'm just trying to pick my jaw up off of
the floor. :^)
--
Jason Flatt
E-mail (remove the spaces): jasonflatt @ wizard . com
Voice: +1 702 870 6622
Fax: +1 702 870 3883
Snail Mail: PO Box 44265, Las Vegas, NV 89116-2265, USA
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery Busted? This is a new one,,,
, (continued)
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery Busted? This is a new one,,,, bluebird, 07/27/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery Busted? This is a new one,,,, Phil/CERisE/KG6MBQ, 07/27/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery Busted? This is a new one,,,, Tobias Marx, 07/27/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery Busted? This is a new one,,,, Bearcat M. Sandor, 07/27/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery Busted? This is a new one,,,, Phil/CERisE/KG6MBQ, 07/27/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery Busted? This is a new one,,,, Bearcat M. Sandor, 07/27/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery Busted? This is a new one,,,, Dufflebunk, 07/27/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery Busted? This is a new one,,,, Bearcat M. Sandor, 07/27/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery Busted? This is a new one,,,, Bearcat M. Sandor, 07/27/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] stable/testing branches,
Jason Flatt, 07/29/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] stable/testing branches, Tony Smith, 07/30/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.