[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#74542] [PATCH 00/11] Improved tooling for package updates
From: |
Simon Tournier |
Subject: |
[bug#74542] [PATCH 00/11] Improved tooling for package updates |
Date: |
Tue, 26 Nov 2024 17:04:57 +0100 |
Hi,
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 at 15:42, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
> Another point: having a single “upgrade manifest” probably won’t scale,
> first because it takes time to evaluate it (looking for the latest
> upstream version of all these packages), second because the jobset will
> be messy if it contains tons of unrelated upgrades.
Yes, that’d be my suggestion: having a better filtering strategy for
’leaf-packages’…
> So I’m thinking that probably we’ll want focused upgrade manifests: one
> for selected security-critical packages, one for the astronomy packages
> so Sharlatan can save a bit on energy at home ;-), one for R packages,
> and so on.
…so yes, it appears to me better to have security for one, then maybe
one per team? Or per updater?
> Another one I’d like to have: automatic ungrafting so that we could
> apply ungrafting packages “anytime” (ideally!).
You read in my dreams! ;-)
> The sky’s the limit!
Let touch the void…
Cheers,
simon
- [bug#74542] [PATCH 08/11] gnu-maintenance: ‘gnu-ftp’ updater excludes GnuPG-hosted packages., (continued)
- [bug#74542] [PATCH 00/11] Improved tooling for package updates, Ludovic Courtès, 2024/11/26
- [bug#74542] [PATCH 00/11] Improved tooling for package updates,
Simon Tournier <=
- [bug#74542] [PATCH 00/11] Improved tooling for package updates, Simon Tournier, 2024/11/26
- [bug#74542] [PATCH 00/11] Improved tooling for package updates, Suhail Singh, 2024/11/26
- [bug#74542] [PATCH v2 01/16] transformations: Export ‘package-with-upstream-version’., Ludovic Courtès, 2024/11/29
- [bug#74542] [PATCH v2 00/16] Improved tooling for package updates, Ludovic Courtès, 2024/11/29