Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 25 Not Scheduling A Mass Rebuild Is Raising Some Concerns

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by bug77 View Post

    Well, now there are voices asking for package rebuilds. F22-23 or so were delayed because of the installer. And generally speaking, developers seem unable to cut buggy features from releases.

    Now don't get me wrong, Fedora is a fantastic piece of work. But for all their technical prowess, I cannot understand how the developers can't figure out how to do proper time-based releases. (I actually do, I just don't like the answer )

    Edit: Oh and it relates to Flash in that you can bet money on both: Fedora being delayed and Flash being in a sorry state.
    I still feel like this isn't a problem, given Fedora's goals. If Fedora had an LTS/enterprise support, then I would say timing would probably actually matter, but this is often filled by distros like CentOS, Scientific Linux or RHEL (which is in turn based on fedora anyway).

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Mystro256 View Post
      I still feel like this isn't a problem, given Fedora's goals. If Fedora had an LTS/enterprise support, then I would say timing would probably actually matter, but this is often filled by distros like CentOS, Scientific Linux or RHEL (which is in turn based on fedora anyway).

      Haven't you heard that RHEL/CentOS are going to stay something like Fedora Enterprise Edition? They plan to update major desktop software with every point release.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by chilek View Post


        Haven't you heard that RHEL/CentOS are going to stay something like Fedora Enterprise Edition? They plan to update major desktop software with every point release.
        I'm not 100% sure what you're saying; AFAIK Red Hat is now sponsoring CentOS (as of 2 years ago) and trying to make CentOS follow RHEL closer, rather than lag behind it.
        Do you have a source for your claim?

        Comment


        • #14
          This is very bad. It means not all packages will be tested to compile correctly under gcc6.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by hussam View Post
            This is very bad. It means not all packages will be tested to compile correctly under gcc6.

            Upstream already does this as part of their CI infrastructure.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by hussam View Post
              This is very bad. It means not all packages will be tested to compile correctly under gcc6.
              No it doesn't, because we've already *done* the GCC 6 mass rebuild. In February. It will be in Fedora 24.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by Michael_S View Post
                I've never worked anywhere that consistently delivered software on deadline, and none of my employers have to deal with the sheer amount of code that the Fedora team does. I think expecting them to meet projected dates is absurd - they would either need to ship garbage, or fall much further behind upstream projects.
                You must have missed Ubuntu (and derivatives). Or Chrome. Or Firefox.
                There's plenty if software that has time-based releases. You just have to remember the iron triangle rule and let scope float.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by bug77 View Post

                  You must have missed Ubuntu (and derivatives). Or Chrome. Or Firefox.
                  There's plenty if software that has time-based releases. You just have to remember the iron triangle rule and let scope float.
                  Chrome and Firefox is nowhere near the amount of code that Fedora deals with. Firefox is just one of the tens of thousands of components that Fedora ships. Ubuntu focuses on time over other factors. Fedora is explicitly not a time based release but a hybrid release where release criteria is considered more important than a strict schedule. This isn't hard to understand. Different projects have different scope and goals.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post

                    Chrome and Firefox is nowhere near the amount of code that Fedora deals with. Firefox is just one of the tens of thousands of components that Fedora ships. Ubuntu focuses on time over other factors. Fedora is explicitly not a time based release but a hybrid release where release criteria is considered more important than a strict schedule. This isn't hard to understand. Different projects have different scope and goals.
                    Oh, it is hard to understand. If you're going for scope, stop publishing (tentative) roadmaps, that's all there is to it.
                    And the size of the project hardly matters at all. It's about whether you have the discipline to keep unfinished work out of your release branch.

                    Plus, in al my years as a software developmer, I haven't seen a situation where something marketed as "hybrid" doesn't translate into "mess". One of my favourites is the "hybrid agile" development method. You see that almost everywhere where management gets that agile is a thing, but doesn't truly get what it means.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by bug77 View Post

                      Oh, it is hard to understand. If you're going for scope, stop publishing (tentative) roadmaps, that's all there is to it.
                      What does hiding a schedule in an open source project accomplish exactly and how would they even do that?

                      The schedule and roadmaps are published because this is an open source project and there are needs to coordinate internally with thousands of contributors spread across the globe and externally with other projects since Fedora contributors are deeply involved with including glibc, gcc, gnome etc.

                      Originally posted by bug77 View Post

                      And the size of the project hardly matters at all. It's about whether you have the discipline to keep unfinished work out of your release branch.
                      This isn't your typical development branch of a single software project. It's not only about the sheer size of the project but the number of different components and the interactions between them and the goals of the project.

                      Originally posted by bug77

                      Plus, in al my years as a software developmer, I haven't seen a situation where something marketed as "hybrid" doesn't translate into "mess". One of my favourites is the "hybrid agile" development method. You see that almost everywhere where management gets that agile is a thing, but doesn't truly get what it means.
                      Sorry you have bad experiences with whatever "hybrid agile" means but the method we have in Fedora works very well for Fedora for its needs. As simple as that.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X