On 01/13/2011 05:31 PM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
> "So: QA 5.6 and 6.0 in parallel or prefer one release over the other.
> Imho, 5.6 impacts existing installs, should get higher pref. Thoughts ?"
> Agree. A public announcement of a decision on this, when made, would
> help head off a lot of user questions.
From my perspective:
- 5.6 impacts existing installs
- 5.6 and updates contain security issues
- 5.x buildsys and process is fairly well tested and completely
independent from 6.x; the main resources are not even hosted in the same
- the 5.6 testing process, for whatever automation we have at the
moment, is completely independent from 6.x's stuff ; the patching
process is also completely automated ( Except for a few packages that I
need to do by hand and a handful others that pitch in with specific
patches - but overall its fairly quickly done )
- Finally, all packages for 5.6 are in the buildqueue and first round of
builds is complete ( the last package dropped out about 2 minutes back ).
The only place where there is an overlap is in the QA process. But my
guess is that having been through 5 previous releases, the QA guys can
address this fairly quickly.
however there are a few other implications that need to be considered
before making a decision. Firstly, the mirror situation. If we were to
drop 5.6 in a few days time - we would need to wait for mirror's to
stabilise before we move to releasing 6.0. I am not sure what that time
lag needs to be, but it should be possible to workout.
What I am going to propose is that lets let both the threads run through
for the moment. Lets meet in #email@example.com at 1600 hrs
on Friday the 14th Jan 2011 and talk about this, get a plan together.
That time should hopefully be late enough for the Americans to be awake,
but early enough for the Germans to not be drunk yet
CentOS-devel mailing list