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.
