[csw-maintainers] Release process for current (was: Re: Thematics month proposal)

Sebastian Kayser skayser at opencsw.org
Mon Jan 19 00:42:17 CET 2009


Peter Bonivart wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>> I dont think that playing games like that is beneficial to the quality of
>> CSW packages. But that seems to be what Peter is aiming for, since the
>> other cases are Already Handled.
> 
> I wouldn't call disclosing the process and sharing the load playing
> games but it's nice to hear your view of it.
> 
>> In my opinion, it would be a bad thing, to have one set of packages that
>> are put into "current"  via one person, that have strict consistency to them,
>> and then have another set of packages, allowed to go into current
>> by a different person, that did not have consistency to them.
> 
> There's really no defence to your single of point of failure strategy.
> You're just getting desperate and now you're insulting anyone wanting
> to help even before they get a chance. Do you really think that no one
> can do what you do? Blastwave does fine without your help, I have made
> an alternative to pkg-get and Dago basically does what you when it
> comes to the current versus testing repos. You're defending your
> position with secrecy and discrediting.

Just some questions, because i have never been in the position and i
would like to understand the discussion: Has the release process with
Phil as the single point of getting packages into current shown a major
bottleneck so far? Or is it the manual nature (effort on the maintainers
side) of the release process?

Did packages get rejected out of uncertain or non-understandable
reasons? Do we have a truck factor issue with Phil as the only path to
current at the moment? What's the exact pain that is trying to be cured?

Sebastian



More information about the maintainers mailing list