-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 15:35:43 Michael E Brown wrote:
> Proposal #3: mock 0.7 release
> We are overdue for a release. To that end, I will tag the current
> master branch as 0.7 for release. I will push mock 0.7 to rawhide. After
> a period of time in rawhide (one week?), I will create a release for
> Fedora 7 to push into updates-testing/. Announcements will be sent to
> the lists for each of these releases.
>
I'd rather not wait for a rawhide timeout to get it into updates-testing for
Fedora 7/6. I've done some extensive testing and I'm satisfied with it
myself, but want to get it into updates-testing asap for Fedora 7. Fedora 6
doesn't have a -testing for Extras packages so that's a bit more risky, I'd
be OK with delaying that one a bit. So instead I'd propose a release to
rawhide and updates-testing ASAP, give it a short time or enough good
feedback before releasing to Extras 6 and stable updates 7.
I agree that we need to get this one to updates-testing as soon as
possible (entirely because we've gone too long without pushing bugfixes).
I think our normal mode should be to push to rawhide, wait a bit for the
screaming to die down (maybe fix a few bugs), then push to
updates-testing. Is that the intended flow of events?
> We will implement the above after signoff by Clark Williams and
Jesse
> Keating.
I sign off on the policy, and apologize for the duplicate -jesse branches.
I sign off as well.
Not a problem about the branches; we just realized after talking that we
needed a policy on how it should be done and it seemed like we'd be "in
a maze of twisty branches, all alike" if we didn't set a policy.
Clark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGbv1vHyuj/+TTEp0RAhwKAJ9edgV9tMVsEF/RBiBuV1MUrq71eQCeJAQi
tGggP0iEnNAy+ITzXaILQC0=
=XyUK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----