[RFC] Proposal to change the structure of the website view/download areas and handling of "testing" releases

Jeroen Coumans jeroen at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon May 17 08:35:39 PDT 2004

Kevin P. Fleming said the following on 17-05-2004 16:40:
> Jeroen Coumans wrote:
>> - testing = relatively stable book development (eg. minor package 
>> updates, text improvements etc.)
> But this is exactly what _I_ said! :-)

Well, you claimed the testing branch was only for released versions of 
testing, I claim it is a regular development branch.
But since we agree there's no need to argue about this :-)

>> That's a non-existing problem. The testing branch isn't intended for 
>> user testing, the tagged releases are.
> Agreed, so now I am asking what the point of rendering the "testing" 
> branch on a daily basis is, if it's not for testing? If it's just for 
> the editors to be able to see the results of their work then fine, but I 
> don't think it should be visible to the general LFS community then, 
> otherwise we _will_ get people trying to do builds from it.

But what is wrong with that? We've always allowed it, and it's part of 
the whole OSS-culture, namely transparent and externally available 
development. The development page clearly states what branch people 
should use for what case, so they know the risks. And if people find a 
bug in a released test version, they can check the daily rendering to 
see if the bug still exists.

Besides that, I also think it's important that people can watch daily 
progress of development online without installing all of the docbook 
stuff required for rendering it.

So, to counter your question with a question, what is _wrong_ with 
having a daily render available, when it's clearly marked as testing?

Jeroen Coumans

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list