Re: infrastructure modest proposal



Tom Horsley wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:40:00 +0000
Anne Wilson wrote:


Fact: the push of dbus directly to stable was a mistake.. it was not
intentional

Devs and maintainers are not allowed to make mistakes! That would imply that
they are human beings, and we can't have users with such dangerous thoughts!


Well, that was what my original proposal was about. Pore old humans
can decide to push things to "almost updates", but only a computer
which verifies the updates can be applied successfuly to at least one
test instance of a fedora install can push the updates out of "almost
updates" and into "updates".

Of course, I wasn't thinking about the dbus incident specifically,
since that version of dbus applied with no conflicts, it would have
made it through the automated test as well. I was thinking more
about all the conflicts which continually show up where some new
package needs a new library and the new library isn't available
yet, etc. Just a quick automated test to prevent obvious problems
from reaching updates, but short of a full-blown dependency analysis
of the entire repo.


FWIW, the 3 layer model is used to great effect in everyday business.
First, there's "testing" where the developers get to play to their
hearts content and, hopefully, get a product to "production" level.
Then the product goes to "qa" or "qc" where it "burns in" for awhile
with other products that may or may not "play nice" with it (aren't
double quotes wonderous little things!). If they don't "play nice"
together then it goes back to testing for more work and then back to
qa/qc until it all works as planned. Then, and only then, does it move
to production. I understand that Fedora is a bunch of folks doing the
work on a volunteer basis but that just makes the idea of a qa
environment that much more useful.

Kevin

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Installing fedora at school
    ... Where exactly on the Fedora site does it say that "FC is a testing ... by my statement that I would not use FC in a production environment nor ... routine updates on the production machine, but would put updates on a ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Fedora Core 6 No More
    ... Shall I continue using this version or shall I upgrade to Fedora 8?? ... It means that RedHat will no longer be providing any more updates of any ... Hi I am using FC5 still on my production and test systems. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: infrastructure modest proposal
    ... there's "testing" where the developers get to play to their ... hearts content and, hopefully, get a product to "production" level. ... I understand that Fedora is a bunch of folks doing the ... If the moves to/from updates-testing were batched in all-or-nothing updates, or another layer of updates-qa was added for this batch move process, it might actually become possible to do meaningful tests with packages in their proposed production context. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Fedora Core 6 No More
    ... IMHO Fedora 8 is still too new and untested to be used in production ... I have been using fedora core 6 in production since its launch, ... As redhat/fedora announced its end of life; ... Can I apply updates after end of life? ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: non-disclosure of infrastructure problem a management issue?
    ... The University of Bergen has 500 linux clients running Fedora. ... updates have stopped, and until the nature of the problem is revealed ... type admin passwords to our servers ... strong control of resources that they depend on. ...
    (Fedora)