On 2024-08-16 00:37, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
On 16/08/2024 01:34, henrichhart...@tuta.io wrote:
Hi Miroslav,

Please see my email titled: "Quarterly backport for multimedia/x265 patch" sent to this list a few hours before yours. Shortly after sending it, the patch was committed to 2024Q3. Builders will have to catch up, but hopefully things can be resolved.

I do feel like this could have been caught and fixed faster with some better alerting. I've heard of pkg-fallout and know little of it, but maybe it should have noticed this? Or did it? I have no idea.

I know it's a terrible experience when pkg is wanting to remove your desktop packages in bulk.

Thank you for pointing to this thread.
This is really bad experience with quarterly branch. I think the branch should be
published only after the successful build of main packages. Blindly created
quarterly branch which is not working for about 6 weeks is terrible experience.
While I completely agree. I'm wondering if this isn't more a pkg(8) deficit. eg; if pkg first determined that all/most of the packages intended to be upgraded did not exist, issue a warn, with the
option to bail/quit. Leaving the system untouched.

--Chris

Kind regards
Miroslav Lachman

--
Be a measuring stick of quality. Not everyone is
used to an environment where excellence is expected.

Reply via email to