[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: core-updates merged!
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: core-updates merged! |
Date: |
Thu, 27 Mar 2014 10:37:09 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.130007 (Ma Gnus v0.7) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) |
"Thompson, David" <address@hidden> skribis:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
>> "Thompson, David" <address@hidden> skribis:
>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> I've just merged core-updates in master, and Hydra has already built
>>>> most of it. So that brings glibc 2.19, grep 2.18, libgc 7.4, guile
>>>> 2.0.11, bash 6.3, the ability to use directories as package sources
>>>> (instead of tarballs), and a bunch of other updates and improvements.
>>>
>>> bash 6.3? Is this a typo or have I missed something?
>>
>> 4.3, indeed. :-)
>
> I didn't realize that bash had made a release last month. Did we
> influence this release? I remember reading about the pile of patches
> for 4.2.
I’m not sure we have this much influence yet. ;-)
>>> Merging core-updates every 2 months sounds reasonable to me, fwiw.
>>> What are the potential downsides to frequently merging core-updates?
>>> Too much package rebuilding? Unstable software? Just curious if
>>> there are any good reasons for a more conservative approach.
>>
>> The main issue is too much rebuilding, yes, and perhaps sometimes we'd
>> gather very few changes in 2 months.
>>
>> Ludo'.
>
> Could we skip a merge cycle if there haven't been many changes or
> would that be too inconsistent?
Well yeah, we’ll see how it goes and adjust the process. But we first
need to actually follow the process to get some hindsight. :-)
Ludo’.