Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   CentOS Docs (http://www.linux-archive.org/centos-docs/)
-   -   FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess (http://www.linux-archive.org/centos-docs/374253-faq-general-rebuildreleaseprocess.html)

Phil Schaffner 05-21-2010 02:41 PM

FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess
 
Just updated the subject page

http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess

based on Karanbir's comment on centos-devel:

http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2010-May/005545.html

Is there better material available to replace the erroneous content, or
should the page be removed?

Phil

_______________________________________________
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

Karanbir Singh 05-21-2010 03:04 PM

FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess
 
Hi,

On 05/21/2010 03:41 PM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
> Just updated the subject page
>
> http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess
>

There is nothing wrong with the process mentioned on that page - its
just not the one being used in CentOS anymore. So adapting the title and
the headings on that page should be a good start. Specially important is
that the overall gist of what is going on is correct ~ rebuilding
packages, compare to upstream and push it out.

- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

Alan Bartlett 05-21-2010 03:46 PM

FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess
 
On 21 May 2010 16:04, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@karan.org> wrote:

> There is nothing wrong with the process mentioned on that page - its
> just not the one being used in CentOS anymore. So adapting the title and
> the headings on that page should be a good start. Specially important is
> that the overall gist of what is going on is correct ~ rebuilding
> packages, compare to upstream and push it out.

KB,

On inspection of the Revision History for that page one can see --

3 2009-10-19 22:17:29 5232 RussHerrold expand the build
script outline beyond simple pulls from the mailing list
2 2009-10-16 11:42:21 3786 JohnnyHughes

So, assuming you have overruled both Johnny and Russ, will you please
make "the one being used in CentOS" known to the rest of the world.

I trust your wording above, and hence the implicit message, was an
error. I was lead to believe, after the Lance Davis affair of last
summer, that there would be no more secrecy or any unilateral
decisions made by one person.

Alan.
_______________________________________________
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs

Karanbir Singh 05-21-2010 04:12 PM

FAQ/General/RebuildReleaseProcess
 
On 05/21/2010 04:46 PM, Alan Bartlett wrote:
> So, assuming you have overruled both Johnny and Russ, will you please
> make "the one being used in CentOS" known to the rest of the world.

Think about it for a second, you don't feel that process's are changable
? Would you like to point me to where it says that what we were doing at
one stage will never ever change ? I havent overruled anyone there, just
pointed out that content on there no longer reflects the process -
however, the gist of the article is still correct.

> I trust your wording above, and hence the implicit message, was an
> error. I was lead to believe, after the Lance Davis affair of last
> summer, that there would be no more secrecy or any unilateral
> decisions made by one person.

Given that you are not a part of the team that handles buildsystem
issues, what made you think that any of these process's were down to
only one person ?

- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:42 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.