MicroReleaseExceptions

Differences between revisions 3 and 4
⇤ ← Revision 3 as of 2007-08-14 19:24:19 →
Size: 920
Editor: sites
Comment: change process
← Revision 4 as of 2007-08-14 19:27:20 → ⇥
Size: 973
Editor: sites
Comment: approved version
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 1: Line 1:
'''This is a ''proposed'' change, and must be ratified by the Tech Board first.''' '''This was ratified by the Tech Board on 2007-08-14.'''
Line 10: Line 10:
  * Changes to the exception list must be brought to the TB via email   * Changes to the exception list must be brought to the TB via email. The request is expected to include justification against the above criteria.
Line 12: Line 12:
 * Existing de facto exceptions are:  * Existing approved exceptions are:

This was ratified by the Tech Board on 2007-08-14.

SRU micro version update exception

  • Allow for an exception in SRUs to the "patch must be as small and unintrusive as possible" requirement for specific packages that meet the criteria:
    • upstream supports micro-version updates to stable releases
    • upstream has a sufficiently high level of regression testing for their stable releases
    • regression tests are enabled in the package's build
  • The technical board will have the responsibility to maintain and review the list of packages that are exceptions to the SRU rule, as well as approve package additions.
    • Changes to the exception list must be brought to the TB via email. The request is expected to include justification against the above criteria.
    • Changes can be approved via any single TB member
  • Existing approved exceptions are:
    • firefox
    • mozilla-thunderbird, thunderbird
    • postgresql-8.1, postgresql-8.2

StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions (last edited 2015-09-29 16:25:28 by pitti)